This week I complete three years of column writing with this paper. My first piece was on August 8, 2004, under the headline ‘A Prime Ministerial embrace for August 15’. Three days from now, the prime minister will once again be addressing the nation for the fourth time from the ramparts of the Red Fort. Would he concentrate on the next one year or on the last 60 years of our independence? I guess both. For an ancient civilisation like ours, a mere 60 years is, in a sense, a short time. However, six decades of planned economic development is long enough to ask how well have we done?
First, having remained a democracy in spite of serious economic under-development is no mean achievement. Regrettably, the transition from caste or communal-based politics to a development-centric approach is far from complete. The increased intolerance of incumbent governments and elected representatives, growth of regional political parties, and the habit of governance through a coalition fabric has only strengthened our democratic traditions.
The debate on whether this form of governance is best suited to our needs has been somewhat relegated to the background. Governance within a federal polity is hardly questioned even though issues of improving governance through smaller administrative entities, redefining the dynamics of Centre-State relations and improving consensus seeking in coalitions of splinter political parties continue to deserve serious consideration.
Second, in engaging with the rest of the world the policy of non-alignment sheltered India from the politics of the Cold War. However, the break up of the Soviet Union was an important historical event and forging new alliances with other partners, including a strategic partnership with the United States and making our foreign policy more broad-based is advantageous as we increasingly integrate with the global economy.
Third, on the economic front, the initial decades of our independence focused on food and foreign exchange security. A strategy of planned economic development was necessary since both private entrepreneurship and private capital were nascent and not readily forthcoming. Public sectors served both an economic and social purpose even though extending their reach and creating monopolistic structures resulted in multiple inefficiencies. Creating centres of educational excellence gave us multiple benefits. The failure to adjust “a planned economic strategy approach” when the rest of Asia had begun to do so is a story of many missed opportunities. We have now substantially corrected course and the current economic buoyancy, along with many other favourable indicators, augurs well for the future. Nonetheless, poverty remains unacceptably high, inclusive growth an elusive dream and on critical indicators of human development like primary education, health care, child nutrition, the performance remains an international embarrassment. We have also failed in re-adjusting our agricultural strategy in providing gainful employment to the vast number of young joining the labour force to seek alternative livelihood patterns outside agriculture. Re-locating people and their jobs in consonance with the emerging demographic profile remains an under-addressed challenge.
Fourth, the emerging institutional and regulatory challenges deserve priority consideration. The legislature, the executive and the judiciary, by functioning with autonomy, have imparted stability, but increasingly their roles and conflicting jurisdictions are causing irritation. Previous attempts for a relook at our Constitution and the changes necessary in the contemporary context have unfortunately been politicised. Mechanisms for inter-state consultations remain inadequate. The reform of the civil services and preventing their excessive politicisation has received more rhetoric than action. A permanent civil service is an insurance against political volatility but far greater transparency in selection and placements in a merit order system, without playing favourites, is needed along with periodic reinvigoration through induction of outside expertise with domain knowledge. This is equally true of the multiple regulatory structures we have created or are in the offing. The broader institutional concerns need to be addressed for meeting the development imperatives. There is need for greater national consensus and trust among the major political parties.
Coming to the year in question, the prime minister should take credit for a year of high overall growth and stability. The nuclear deal with the United States may not provide immediate energy but greatly enhances India’s acceptance on the international high table. No other single move could have achieved this. Beyond this, as we are riding the high economic cycle, and since elections are still sometime away, there is a short window of opportunity. We must get on to the new growth curve of 10 per cent but this would not be automatic. Action inter-alia must entail renewed vigour on energy security, harnessing alternative energy sources, bigger thrust for planned urbanisation filling the missing middle for employment generation, improved Centre-state consultations, labour law changes, reinitiating the postponed public sector re-structuring and product reforms to further improve our competitiveness and the ease of doing business. A longer term view on internal public debt management beyond the current revenue buoyancy is also needed.
India is poised to become a major economic powerhouse. If the multiple international projections are to be believed, the next 60 years cannot be the same as the past 60 years. Both our challenges and opportunities are enormous. We must grasp them. We cannot afford any more to hasten slowly. We must hasten.