As far as clean slates go,there is nothing like a general election or a Kamaraj plan (a plan thought up by the master politician K. Kamaraj,which asked all ministers to tender their resignations and allow the political executive to choose,rather than merely juggle,shuffle or reshuffle). But since neither was really an option,a few months ago the prime minister himself voiced his determination to reallocate work and restructure ministries.
The much-awaited reshuffle,despite not touching the big four ministries and displaying a touching deference to coalition allies,does have something to offer if you look at the new politicians brought in credible,solid faces like K. Chandra Deo can make much of the ministry they have been given. Its a thumbs up to Jairam Rameshs unorthodox thinking,and Salman Khursheed has been brought in the hope of stemming the damage caused to this government and the PMs image from the legal wrangles they have been entangled in. Jayanthi Natarajan,Rajeev Shukla and Jitendra Singh,among others,can be expected to represent the party in government and forge a more enduring bond between the two powerful forces that make UPA 2 what it is the Congress president and the prime minister.
UPA 1 set the tone,heavily influenced by two crucial forces outside the government: the Congress president,who consciously renounced the top job; and the Left,which stayed away despite 61 MPs. In the case of UPA 2,Rahul Gandhis silent renunciation combines with Sonia Gandhis power on this influential outside. But never mind how heavy it gets outside Raisina Hill,governance and shifts in ministries are not extraneous to the UPAs politics,they are central to its political positioning.
Reams have been devoted to the tensions,stresses,strains and perils of those caught between the party and the government. However,the fact is that UPA 2s campaign and mandate the way the idea was stitched together two years ago fuses party and government much more closely than they would like to believe. A fusion of its slogans with the government is what carved out its unique politics,and ensured its success,the last time around.
Exactly 20 years ago,when the present PM delivered his first budget speech as finance minister,the slogan for undertaking economic reforms stressed on the human face but in the immediate aftermath and the enormity of the changes unleashed by the new ideas,there was some trouble identifying this human face. Exiled from government for eight years after 1996,there was no political ownership of the new economic policies by the Congress until 2009 when,willy-nilly,they were sold as a route to better deliver to its constituents.
UPA 1 appeared to be composed of disparate forces; the National Advisory Council thought and asserted itself differently. But the underlying premise was that the politics of delivering to the aam admi had to be through the new economic policy,and on dividends secured with greater liberalisation. The ability to talk of a better investment climate to one section,along with material benefits to a different set of political constituents,was to be achieved by drawing a distinction between certain progressive parties that catered to specific social categories,and itself. The claim was that the Congress was not fixated on identity issues. It was progressive progressive plus,if you like,as it delivered on material goods for Muslims,Dalits,the new middle classes and all the other social groups it was politically committed to.
This simultaneously complex and straightforward political argument that made UPA 2 (or Congress) shine among its political competitors in 2009 was premised on the fact of its government delivering on its promises by cleaning up and decluttering administration,and by legislating on a whole host of entitlements. As he took on his second innings,the prime minister emphasised his commitment to making delivery mechanisms work. The talk of food security,an anti-communal violence bill,and more recently,the offer of better things to UP voters are all premised on this boast of better delivery mechanisms. That is also what will be showcased in UP. And that is why even small changes,in both leading faces and policy,are as important for the party out there as they are for those within the system. Party and government are more closely locked together than ever.
The distinction between party and government is a good alibi for both sides to bank on when Anna Hazare skips a meal,or the Supreme Court frowns at an appointment. But when elections are around the corner,the reality is made clear.
For example,when it came visiting railway accident sites in UP and in Assam,the minister of state for railways,Mukul Roy,virtually told the PM to go to Kamrup himself. However,all wired up to face the UP test,Rahul Gandhi offered to visit at least one of the sites,in an example of the party rushing in to compensate and cover up for misgovernance demonstrating his awareness of how entwined the two are.
seema.chishti@expressindia.com
