‘Those who went for early polls on feelgood factor regretted it. Why, then, should the deal good factor bring on early elections?’

Right from the beginning his position was that no one wants elections. And that’s true. But if an early election looks imminent, how can a politician say, ‘We’re not ready.’ Everyone will say, ‘We are ready for polls.’

VARGHESE K. GEORGE: You spoke about the glorious history of Bihar. Is this all the good that remains in Bihar today? As of today, what do you think is good about Bihar?

It’s good that Bihar has a glorious past; in fact, a large part of India’s history is the history of Bihar. It’s a matter of pride for Bihar that many great people lived there and worked there: Buddha, Mahavir, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, Rajendra Prasad. The second freedom struggle, that is, the Jaiprakash Narain movement, flourished there. There is plenty of water, fertile land, and people are hard-working. These are good things. But Bihar has been associated with bad things as well — its feudal set-up, the lack of work culture, the caste-ridden society. At one point Buddhism flourished in Bihar; now you hardly find any Buddhists there. But it shouldn’t be forgotten that Bihar is a sleeping giant. When it wakes up, it won’t lag behind any other state in the country. History will repeat itself and Bihar will attain the glory it used to have. Its people are hard-working and talented and have proved their mettle elsewhere. They will contribute to its upward surge.

COOMI KAPOOR: People from Bihar excel through their ingenuity and hard work when outside Bihar. But what happens inside Bihar?

That’s a positive sign, isn’t it? True talent is put to the test only in challenging situations. Inside Bihar, among their own people who are guided by caste structures, jealousy, others will drag them down. This is a bad thing. But these people excel in places alien to them. This establishes that they are talented. At home, they get caught in the traps that pull them down. The same traps don’t exist outside Bihar. And they have to rely only on their talent and hard work.

COOMI KAPOOR/ GAUTAM CHIKERMANE: The bad things about Bihar have been there since long. What did your government (the former RJD government) do to counter that and take Bihar to the heights it deserves to touch?

If you look at the figures compiled by the first Planning Commission, you will find that Bihar got the lowest per capita investment in India. At a time when the national average was Rs 40 per capita, it was Rs 25 for Bihar, the lowest in India. Who is answerable? Till the time of the fourth Planning Commission, the figures were okay. Afterwards, they slipped. This reversal happened two planning periods ahead of Lalu Prasad Yadav taking over Bihar. But people now blame Lalu for it; this is contrary to facts.

Consider the freight equalisation policy. It meant that Bihar, which, when Jharkhand was part of it, possessed huge reserves of ores and minerals, did not benefit. If mineral resources had been cheaper in Bihar, it would have attracted investment. But the equalisation policy ensured that ore in Bihar, despite abundant supply, would cost the same as ore in Tamil Nadu or Gujarat or any other state with far less reserves. If you look at history, it’s abundantly clear that Lalu Prasad Yadav’s regime — though I do not say it worked very efficiently — is not solely responsible for Bihar’s plight. I strongly contest the allegation that Lalu Prasad Yadav’s regime ruined Bihar. It is 100 per cent false. The economic factors I outlined earlier, the natural calamities — all that contributed to Bihar’s state of affairs today.

Everyone tries to blame the 15-year regime of Lalu Prasad Yadav, but look at the assistance Bihar has received during the period. In rural development alone Bihar received Rs 600 crore per annum, after Rs 1,800 crore per annum was cut in funds during that period. Bihar lost a large amount of Central assistance during the NDA period. But now, when we are in power, Bihar is getting all these funds. When Nitish Kumar (the present chief minister) was in the Central government, Bihar used to get Rs 600 crore in rural development; we are now providing about Rs 2,500 crore per annum in rural development alone. But people continue to blame Lalu.

VARGHESE K. GEORGE: Could you please explain the difference this made to the state?

When Nitish Kumar was with the Central government, Bihar used to get Rs 600 crore for rural development schemes. This excluded allocation for road works. Of this, for example, only Rs 200 crore was meant for rural housing under the Indira Awaas Yojana in the state. But now, when I am at the Centre, rural housing has got Rs 1,063 crore this year. This is more than the total annual funds for rural development sent to Bihar when Nitish Kumar was at the Centre. Similarly, if you look at the rural roads programme — the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY), started during former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s time — the NDA used to spend barely about Rs 2,500 crore per annum across the country. We are now spending Rs 12,500 crore — nearly five times that amount. Earlier, Bihar used to get about Rs 150 crore, or Rs 50 lakh-60 lakh per block, resulting in a battle among MPs, MLAs, and others. We have increased the funds substantially.

VARGHESE K. GEORGE: If Bihar lost a substantial portion of Central assistance during the earlier rule, are you trying to compensate Bihar now? And how successful has the Bihar government been in spending this amount now?

Bihar is now getting its due share. Earlier it wasn’t. But when it comes to spending Central funds, this Bihar government is even worse than the earlier one. Utilisation of funds in Bihar is worse than that in Jharkhand.

PAMELA PHILIPOSE: What’s the problem with the current government in Bihar?

If you look at the big picture, the National Common Minimum Programme (NCMP), which is the Bible for the UPA government, is a plus factor for Bihar. It promises all efforts against regional disparity and special attention to states left disadvantaged in the earlier plans. Now, works cannot be stopped saying there is no fund from the Centre. The Lalu government didn’t have funds; he couldn’t have been expected to wave a magic wand. Now, when huge funds are flowing to Bihar, the current government is under the influence of one factor — oxygen from the media, which has been favourable to the current dispensation in the state. Of late, the media has realised the truth. But so far it was blindly supporting the current dispensation.

If you falsely praise a bogus student as intelligent and extraordinary, he will stop studying. The results will drive home the reality. It’s the same with Nitish Kumar.

GAUTAM CHIKERMANE: Why wasn’t the RJD government able to improve law and order in the state? That would have attracted private investment.

Can private investment happen in the absence of infrastructure? For investment, you need electricity, roads, many other things. Private companies will come only when they see their own interests served. People from Bihar had migrated in large numbers to countries like Fiji even in early part of this century. There was no Lalu Prasad Yadav then. Yes, law and order is required, but without basic infrastructure, there will never be any investment.

PAMELA PHILIPOSE: But what about crimes like murder, kidnappings?

The situation is worse now. The media is not highlighting these things now. It will be forced to after some time.

VARGHESE K. GEORGE: But there were caste-based massacres during Lalu Prasad Yadav’s time.

Massacres have been happening much before Lalu Prasad Yadav came on the scene. Killings have in fact increased now. Only recently, 12 people were killed, three people were blinded, and one person was dragged after being chained to a motorcycle. These things don’t get highlighted in the media. Ask the public in Bihar. They say, ‘Laluraj was much better. We committed a mistake.’

VARGHESE K. GEORGE: So will you come back to power in Bihar in the next elections?

Do you have doubts?

D.K. SINGH: You said private investment will not come to Bihar if there is no electricity. But on the nuclear deal, which will increase power generation, you backtrack and say we don’t want elections, deal or no deal.

There is no arguing the fact that there is shortage of energy. We require additional generation of 1 lakh MW to become self-sufficient. For each MW you need Rs 8 crore. We need Rs 8 lakh crore to become self-sufficient. Now, the Left has some ideological problems with the deal. Intelligent people are trying to work out a solution.

It is understandable that the Left parties have a problem with the U.S. Even we don’t agree entirely with the U.S. But don’t we have trade ties with Pakistan despite having fights with them? Is what Myanmar is doing to Aung Sung Suu Kyi right? But we deal with the military junta there. We fought with China, but are we not talking to them? So if it is in our national interest, why not have this deal with the U.S.? And America must be having its own interests in this deal. Such agreements cannot be one-sided. And then, who is more impartial or knowledgeable about such things than Kalam sahib (former president A.P.J. Abdul Kalam)? When he says this is an incomparable deal, why not take his word for it?

VARGHESE K. GEORGE: But are you ready to sacrifice this government for this nuclear deal? Will you able to make it an election issue?

No, no. It’s not an election issue. It’s a developmental issue. Do we need energy or not? Let someone suggest alternatives, and I will oppose this deal.

VARGHESE K. GEORGE: Will you able to make voters in Vaishali (Singh’s constituency) understand the deal and seek votes?

That’s not the issue. So many agreements happen with other countries and no one takes notice. It’s only because America is involved that the deal is being debated widely. The agreement happened in 2005 and now the Left says we will pull down the government. I don’t find any rationale in this. They should have agitated with the same vigour from 2005, and then we could have gone slowly. In this backdrop, we were under the impression that the Left would keep opposing the deal, and we can carry on with the deal. We assumed it was fine. Then all of a sudden they have become adamant. So we have decided to halt.

RAGHVENDRA RAO: You mean to say that since the deal can’t win you votes, there’s no point in going for elections now? Because there’s no election issue right now?

It’s not like that. There’s a lot of work left. That’s why we want elections on time. Those who called for early elections on the ‘feelgood’ factor are regretting it now; why should the ‘deal good’ factor impose early elections?

D.K. Singh: Nitish Kumar has a problem with the number of letters you write to him. How many have you written to him till now?

Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru used to write two letters to the chief ministers every month. I write three to every chief minister, four to Nitish Kumar. Other chief ministers are happy to know that a Central minister is taking interest. Nitish frowns. He says Raghuvansh Babu writes letters like a deputy secretary. The letters are usually of two or two-and-a-half pages. He wants letters to be no more than four lines. But just like a teacher does to a dull student, I explain everything in my letters to Nitish Kumar. I must have written him 150-250 letters; he hasn’t replied to even one. If he just ensures implementation of the points mentioned in those letters, Bihar would become the most progressive state in the country.

COOMI KAPOOR: Studies show that a very small fraction of the money under the NREGA scheme is reaching the intended beneficiaries. That’s why when you kept saying that more districts should be brought under the scheme, the Finance Ministry was very reluctant to make more funds available. But the moment Rahul Gandhi talked about it, it was immediately done.

If someone says money is not reaching the poor, it is 100 per cent incorrect. This scheme is going to become 100 per cent successful. In the first year itself, when the scheme was implemented in just one-third of the country, 2.1 crore people benefited. More than that, this law has created tremendous awareness about things like minimum wages. This is a revolutionary law. It has five main points — awareness, people’s participation, state vigilance and monitoring, transparency and accountability, which is path-breaking.

RAVISH TIWARI: The question was that you had to fight tooth and nail to include more districts under the scheme, even approach the prime minister. But when Rahul Gandhi said all districts must be brought under the scheme, it was immediately done.

It’s right I had proposed 223 districts under the scheme in the second phase. I have said a dozen times in Parliament that the third phase would be implemented in five years. The Planning Commission first proposed 50 districts for the second-phase expansion. The matter went to the prime minister, who asked me to agree for 130 districts for the present, with the commitment that the rest of the districts would be added later. So my proposal to include all districts under the scheme was already there and a consensus had been evolved over it. But two days before I was to meet the prime minister to finalise the details, he fell ill, because of which the decision was delayed by 15 days. Meanwhile, Rahul Gandhi became the general-secretary of the Congress, and somehow, information could have reached to him that this decision was going to be announced. So he put forward his demand that all districts should be included. Perhaps knowing fully well the decision had already been taken. A lot of credit was attributed to him for that. I have no problems. I can only thank him.