On the face of it, President A P J Abdul Kalam’s first post-election address to both Houses of Parliament today may seem largely a repetition of the UPA’s Common Minimum Programme but a careful reading shows that it differs from the CMP in significant if subtle ways. The President’s address, the first policy document of the Manmohan Singh government, lays far more emphasis on the secular and pro-minorities credentials of the government on the one hand, and dilutes, on the other, some of the Left-backed proposals made in the CMP. On the question of secularism and dangers of communalism, the President’s address uses words far stronger than the CMP. For instance, it notes that ‘‘the forces of communalism have been able to vitiate the atmosphere in the country leading to outbreak of riots, the most gruesome face of which was witnessed recently in Gujarat. My government is determined to combat such forces.’’ The address also repeats the CMP’s promise to enact ‘‘a model law to deal with communal violence and encourage states to adopt it’’ to ‘‘examine the question of provding constitutional status to the Minorities Commission’’ and to strive for ‘‘recognition and promotion of Urdu language under Article 345 and 347 of the Constitution.’’ Unlike the CMP which talks loosely of promoting the public sector and encouraging the private sector, the President’s address is more specific about the need for public-private partnerships. It promises to ‘‘enhance the employability of our youth’’ through the establishment of industrial training institutes ‘‘through creative public-private parnerships.’’ The phrase crops up again in the section dealing with development of infrastructure. While the CMP stated that ‘‘public investment in infrastructure will be enhanced, even as the role of private sector is expanded’’, today’s address is more precise: ‘‘Public-private partnerships will be encouraged for expansion of physical infrastructure such as roads, ports, airports, power, railways, water supply and sanitation.’’ While ‘‘public-private partnerships’’ may not raise the hackles of the Left since West Bengal chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee himself has advocated such a path of development, the Left is likely to object to the subtle changes made in the formulations on panchayati raj. Left Front governments have consistently opposed direct devolution of funds from the Centre to the panchayats and insisted that they be routed through the state governments. The Congress, on the other hand, has been keen on direct funding. The CMP reflected a Left-Congress compromise by stating that ‘‘after consultations with states, the UPA government will consider crediting elected Panchayats such funds directly.’’ The President’s address does away with the nuances to state that ‘‘the government will ensure that all funds for poverty alleviation and rural development programmes get directly credited to Panchayat bodies to enable them to serve the people better.’’ Another Left-inspired promise made in the CMP — on the crucial issue of interest rates — is missing from today’s address. The CMP, keeping in mind middle class concerns over falling interest rates on small savings and PF contributions, had said, ‘‘interest rates will provide incentives both to investors and savers, particularly pensioners and senior citizens. The UPA government will never take decisions on the EPF without consultations with and approval of the EPF board.’’ With the goverment’s first budget round the corner, these explicit assurances are missing.
