With an eye on a crucial vote bank, the government continues to wilfully labour under the misapprehension that legislating for further reservations will alleviate the difficulties of the socially disadvantaged. Instead of this superficial gesture, the focus of governmental efforts to create equal opportunities should be at the grassroots level; greater investment and financial aid in primary education is the answer.
But is the Congress party capable of rising above narrow political considerations? Will it prefer expediency over principle on an issue that affects millions of citizens? These are important questions, which in a democracy should certainly be asked of the government of the day. What is worth elucidating is also the fact that no credible explanation is forthcoming on the Congress' dramatic change of stance on the critical issue of reservations. Readers will recall Rajiv Gandhi's opposition to VP Singh's initial implementation of the Mandal Commission's recommendations in 1990. The Congress party's public championing of reservations in 2006 indicates then that its wheel has come a dubious full circle.
The manner in which this episode has played itself out before the public gaze has done little to ennoble the Congress party's reputation for political management. Indeed, the disparate and competing interests of the party's ministers together with their contradictory statements have added to a sense that events are running ahead of the government. So you have Arjun Singh's attempts to portray himself as the party's sole arbiter and spokesman on the one hand and Kapil Sibal's candid doubts as to the proposals on the other hand. In between, the voter is left bewildered. Clarity is away on a summer vacation from the government's agenda at the moment.
The appointment of the four member ministerial committee to examine the reservations issue is designed to soften the uproar. However, with respect to Manmohan Singh, this is belated humbug. The formation of the committee after the matter reached the public domain is an admission of the government's bungling. It is likely that the committee will recommend a 'phased increase' of quotas along with the placatory assurance that seats shall be increased in the educational institutions concerned.
However, whether educational institutions have the capacity or the resources to absorb more students in the absence of greater fiscal assistance is a critical variable to this equation. Operational aspects should not be discarded as somebody else's nuisance. It does matter when IIM-A director, Bakul Dholakia says that the institution cannot 'increase its seats at this juncture as its plate is full'. Narayana Murthy - speaking as the chairman of the governing body of IIM-A - has recently spoken against the governmental proposal to increase the number of seats in view of infrastructural concerns this would pose to the institutions in question.
A contentious issue of public policy demands effective leadership. Sadly, that has been absent in the government's response. The silence of Manmohan Singh bears this into sharp relief. As Prime Minister, it is Manmohan Singh's brief to persuade and inform public opinion regarding the government's policy. However, beyond unobtrusive musings such as 'a balance is required between equity and excellence' he hasn't clearly expressed his position on the current proposals to extend reservations. There is a perception that this well-intentioned architect of the economic reforms process may go down in the annals as the silent Prime Minister. It is up to him to reverse this growing belief.
In this unfortunate conundrum, the public has been left second-guessing as to whether Arjun Singh kept Manmohan Singh in the loop and whether the proposals have his backing. In turn, this raises doubts as to the proper functioning of the cabinet. Similarly, Sonia Gandhi's views on reservations are unknown too. Silence may suit backbenchers; it is neither desirable nor appropriate for the leadership of the world's largest democracy.
Rishabh Bhandari is a lawyer at a global law firm in London. These are his personal views.
first published:May 22, 2006, 14:18 ISTlast updated:May 22, 2006, 14:18 IST
window._taboola = window._taboola || [];_taboola.push({mode: 'thumbnails-mid-article',container: 'taboola-mid-article-thumbnails',placement: 'Mid Article Thumbnails',target_type: 'mix'});
let eventFire = false;
window.addEventListener('scroll', () => {
if (window.taboolaInt && !eventFire) {
setTimeout(() => {
ga('send', 'event', 'Mid Article Thumbnails', 'PV');
ga('set', 'dimension22', "Taboola Yes");
}, 4000);
eventFire = true;
}
});
window._taboola = window._taboola || [];_taboola.push({mode: 'thumbnails-a', container: 'taboola-below-article-thumbnails', placement: 'Below Article Thumbnails', target_type: 'mix' });Latest News
As the protests against reservations spill from the classrooms to the streets, the deep well of public discontent emphasises the unsatisfactory and piecemeal approach of the government to this vital arena of public policy. This entire controversy sheds light into the politically motivated concerns that underpin the proposed extension to the reservation programme. However, it also exposes the political mismanagement within the Congress party that has fed this issue, stoking greater confusion and public unease.
With an eye on a crucial vote bank, the government continues to wilfully labour under the misapprehension that legislating for further reservations will alleviate the difficulties of the socially disadvantaged. Instead of this superficial gesture, the focus of governmental efforts to create equal opportunities should be at the grassroots level; greater investment and financial aid in primary education is the answer.
But is the Congress party capable of rising above narrow political considerations? Will it prefer expediency over principle on an issue that affects millions of citizens? These are important questions, which in a democracy should certainly be asked of the government of the day. What is worth elucidating is also the fact that no credible explanation is forthcoming on the Congress' dramatic change of stance on the critical issue of reservations. Readers will recall Rajiv Gandhi's opposition to VP Singh's initial implementation of the Mandal Commission's recommendations in 1990. The Congress party's public championing of reservations in 2006 indicates then that its wheel has come a dubious full circle.
The manner in which this episode has played itself out before the public gaze has done little to ennoble the Congress party's reputation for political management. Indeed, the disparate and competing interests of the party's ministers together with their contradictory statements have added to a sense that events are running ahead of the government. So you have Arjun Singh's attempts to portray himself as the party's sole arbiter and spokesman on the one hand and Kapil Sibal's candid doubts as to the proposals on the other hand. In between, the voter is left bewildered. Clarity is away on a summer vacation from the government's agenda at the moment.
The appointment of the four member ministerial committee to examine the reservations issue is designed to soften the uproar. However, with respect to Manmohan Singh, this is belated humbug. The formation of the committee after the matter reached the public domain is an admission of the government's bungling. It is likely that the committee will recommend a 'phased increase' of quotas along with the placatory assurance that seats shall be increased in the educational institutions concerned.
However, whether educational institutions have the capacity or the resources to absorb more students in the absence of greater fiscal assistance is a critical variable to this equation. Operational aspects should not be discarded as somebody else's nuisance. It does matter when IIM-A director, Bakul Dholakia says that the institution cannot 'increase its seats at this juncture as its plate is full'. Narayana Murthy - speaking as the chairman of the governing body of IIM-A - has recently spoken against the governmental proposal to increase the number of seats in view of infrastructural concerns this would pose to the institutions in question.
A contentious issue of public policy demands effective leadership. Sadly, that has been absent in the government's response. The silence of Manmohan Singh bears this into sharp relief. As Prime Minister, it is Manmohan Singh's brief to persuade and inform public opinion regarding the government's policy. However, beyond unobtrusive musings such as 'a balance is required between equity and excellence' he hasn't clearly expressed his position on the current proposals to extend reservations. There is a perception that this well-intentioned architect of the economic reforms process may go down in the annals as the silent Prime Minister. It is up to him to reverse this growing belief.
In this unfortunate conundrum, the public has been left second-guessing as to whether Arjun Singh kept Manmohan Singh in the loop and whether the proposals have his backing. In turn, this raises doubts as to the proper functioning of the cabinet. Similarly, Sonia Gandhi's views on reservations are unknown too. Silence may suit backbenchers; it is neither desirable nor appropriate for the leadership of the world's largest democracy.
Rishabh Bhandari is a lawyer at a global law firm in London. These are his personal views.
Comments
0 comment