Democratic process

One of the funnier ways of preventing the passage of a bill through parliament. From the April 18 issue of the Economist ("Trois strikes and you're out"). The bill's aim is to curb internet piracy by blocking persons who repeatedly download copyrighted content from obtaining broadband internet connections.

"But on April 9th, in a surprise vote, the lower house of France’s parliament rejected the law. Only 15 members of President Nicolas Sarkozy’s ruling UMP party, which wrote the bill, turned up for the final vote, which is usually just a matter of procedure—both houses of parliament had already approved the law’s main elements. At the last moment a group of Socialist members rushed in to oppose it, resulting in a 21-15 defeat. According to Libération, a French newspaper, the Socialists had hidden behind heavy curtains [emphasis mine] in the entrance to the parliamentary chamber."

Hiding behind the curtains - hilarious!

Report card 2004-2009

The largest elections in history begin tomorrow. What do I think about the performance of the government about to be replaced, or reelected?

Like many, I was mightily surprised by the victory of the Congress 5 years ago. That vote made me lose most of my faith in the opinion polls conducted by the Indian media. I was pleased with the outcome, though I disapproved of Manmohan Singh becoming prime minister without being elected to the Lok Sabha.

Good

First, the good. The most significant achievements of the government were the enactment of the Right to Information act (RTI) and the National Rural Employment Guarantee scheme (NREG). The RTI has made government more transparent and has made it easier for the citizenry to hold governments and bureaucrats to account. As an avowed partisan of small government, I have misgivings about the NREG. However, designed in a manner to essentially transfer cash to the poor, it is probably the best poverty relief scheme that we have. It seems to have been setup such that there is some local accountability to mitigate leakages.

The nuclear agreement with the United States almost brought down the government. But Singh deserves to be commended for sticking to his guns, ensuring that India's nuclear energy programme can be kickstarted after stalling due to lack of fuel. The behaviour of the BJP with regards to the treaty was disgraceful.

The government continued the work done under the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan begun during the previous government's tenure. The massive investments in this endeavour are correcting a historical wrong and will hopefully give India big dividends in the medium term.

The railways did unexpectedly well under Laloo. I give him credit, if for nothing else than atleast not interfering too much with the technocrats. Also implemented was the Value Added Tax. It was put into progress by the Vajpayee government, but actually implementing anything in India must be given credit :)

Bad

The list of the bads is not long, but has had more impact, unfortunately. The UPA government ruled during a period of unprecedented prosperity. In the five years from April '04 to March '09, India's GDP grew by almost 50%. Tax receipts went up from 1.9 lakh crore in FY04 to an estimated 4.6 lakh crore in FY09! Yet the government ran a deficit in every single year! Subsidising oil and fertilizers, maintaining the army of bureaucrats and waiving farmer debts (often granted in the first place because of government mandated priority sector lending) all wasted significant sums. The resulting debt burden is pushing up interest rates and making it difficult for the private sector to obtain affordable funding. And of course, the government's return on the borrowed funds will surely not be enough to prevent future generations being burdened with additional taxes or inflation.

The highway building programme pushed by the BJP was neglected and it consequently stalled. So was the case with divestment of government stakes in PSUs. Internal security suffered as city after city was subjected to multiple terrorist attacks, and all the government seemed to have were mere words and a home minister who always made sure his clothes were clean and ironed. The Naxalites have been bolder and more destructive in the last five years too, it appears. The constitutional right to freedom of movement for every Indian citizen was allowed to be attacked in the streets of Bombay as the MNS threatened migrants, while both the state and centre looked on in silence.

Overall my impression of the government is that it acted when it should have sat pat (not spending the burgeoning tax revenues, for example), and became a mum spectator when the situation cried out for action (not improving intelligence services and policing even as the Naxalites and Islamic terrorists kept attacking rural and urban areas respectively). Too many wasted opportunities :(

Hope in rural India

The Wall Street Journal has published an article about an example of improving economic conditions in rural Bihar. In my head (I do not know if statistics corroborate this or not), rural Bihar and Orissa are the economically most underdeveloped regions of India.

The article ("India Defies Slump, Powered by Growth in Poor Rural States") focuses on a community called the Mushahar (literally, rat eaters) which it claims include rat meat in their diet to survive. It documents how recent government initiatives to spread education and provide public infrastructure are improving the lives of people. The full article requires paid subscription to read, but I'll quote an excerpt here to give its flavour.

"As the sun came up on a recent day, a group of Mushahar gathered round a water pump to wash clothes. Later in the morning a long line of Mushahar children made their way up a mud embankment and, in a profound departure from community tradition, headed to primary school.

The government has repaired the school's roof in recent months, hired a new teacher and added an extra bathroom to provide privacy for girls. Even so, the school doesn't have chairs or desks, so students sit on empty grain bags and write on a cement floor covered with dirt.

Each day, a group of government-hired Mushahar, known as "motivators," roust children from their homes and escort them to class. Motivator Phulwanti Devi, a recent and rare Mushahar college graduate, says she battles parents almost every morning to release their children from farm work.

"We tell them, 'It will improve their future,'" says Ms. Devi, 25 years old.

"They reply, 'We don't see that you have such a good job.' I tell them: 'I have a diploma, and so I can get a better job. What about you?'"

Still, Ms. Devi and other motivators say attendance at the school has grown. Teachers say about 150 children are enrolled. On a recent day, the motivators rounded up about half that many."

The article also claims that according to the Bihar Institute of Economic Studies, the number of people migrating out of the state dropped 27% in the 2006-08 period compared with 2001-03. Such articles give me hope - if Bihar can progress, India must be on the right path.

Newspapers and worldviews

In 8th standard, I read an essay in a school text book on "intellectual rubbish" by Bertrand Russell. Simply put, this placed me on to the path of serious reading. But more on that some other time.

One of the methods recommended by Russell to avoid becoming too caught up in a bubble of views echoing one's own was to read a variety of newspapers with different editorial opinions. An excellent idea, I think.

In the 'international' (dominated by western countries, but just about international, I warrant) sphere, I read three newspapers regularly. The New York Times (NYT) is left-of-centre, the Economist is libertarian and the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) is right-wing. All three are excellent newspapers, of course, in terms of their quality of reporting and writing. As for their editorial stances, I am closest to the Economist. But reading the NYT Op-ed pages reminds me that there are perfectly reasonable people who actually support trade unions, and scanning a WSJ editorial passionately arguing against inheritance taxes gives me pause for thought. Reading all three definitely helps me to appreciate the range of opinions that can be held by people smarter and better-informed than me, though I may still choose to stick my own ideas.

I wonder whether I can do so for Indian newspapers as well. For many years, I have been a regular reader of the Indian Express (IE). The quality of journalism is very good, though the writing leaves a lot to be desired. As for the editorial side, I often agree with it, but there are regular disagreements too. I just have not been able to get used to any other newspaper, mostly because the frivolous element so dominates them. But as for worldviews, I suspect that most English newspapers (in Bombay atleast) have more or less the same opinions - broadly socially liberal, but too anti-poor (see an earlier entry about how I think that pro-middle class is actually a euphemism for anti-poor). For me to implement Russell's suggestion, I would have to graduate to Hindi or Marathi newspapers. I have tried some Hindi papers, but their quality is simply not good enough to persuade me to read them regularly. Maybe I should take to reading the CPM, RSS and Shiv Sena papers, though I really suspect their quality.