When one considers the turmoil in the BJP and the Left, differences within the ruling Congress party seem too unimportant to merit comment. However, 50 days into UPA II?s term in office, there is considerable evidence of serious differences of opinion within the ruling party on key policy issues. Ultimately, one opinion or the other will prevail. Which opinion prevails will have implications not just for the party but also for the governance of the country. Hence, the urgency to analyse the debate within the Congress.
Fortunately for the Congress, it has two fundamental advantages over its rival political parties on the Left and Right, which will at least prevent differences becoming ugly public spats. First, it is the party in power at least for the next five years. So expect differences to be veiled to an extent.
More importantly, the Congress is bound by the glue of the Nehru-Gandhi family, which everyone in the party accepts as the ultimate arbiter and authority. Interestingly, the two policy areas where the party has taken a firm stand in its first and second tenure have been advocated strongly by Sonia Gandhi. First, the need for a social safety net, which translated into NREG during UPA I, it will probably extend to a food security Act in UPA II. Second, the need for more transparency in government that translated into RTI Act in UPA I, it will extend to quarterly reports to the public on government?s flagship programmes in UPA II. That?s where the Congress consensus on policy matters ends, at least if the conflicting signals sent out after an eminently sensible and reformist presidential address, are an indicator.
Consider the thorny subject of economic reforms. The Congress has lost the precious fig leaf that the Left offered it during UPA I.
Now, the issue of troublesome allies is less severe, though there are indicators that the Congress is already trying to use the Trinamool Congress and DMK as the new fig leaves for inaction on reforms. The real dissent is from within the Congress, as an influential section of the party mistakenly believes that reforms do not go down well with the average voter. They would like to believe that the lack of reforms in UPA I contributed to victory in 2009. The Budget, by postponing crucial reform subjects to another day has created much ambiguity. Is it just a strategic holdback which will enable a strong push later? Or is this in fact the way it will be?
At any rate, the government will have to come clean on a number of issues over the next few months?disinvestment, pension reform, insurance, to name just three. Reforms, including divestment, are crucial to push growth back to a 9% trend?a level at which the government can spend on redistribution without busting the deficit. The modernisers in the Congress must ensure that the Congress turns into a party of the modern Left, like New Labour in the UK, which can combine redistribution with market-friendly growth. At the moment, the matter is far from settled. If the old Congress wins this battle, the economy may falter into mediocre growth and unmanageable government finances.
Economic reform isn?t the only area of differences. Take the crucial education sector, which needs a drastic overhaul if India is to capitalise on its demographic dividend. UPA I squandered five years. It is, of course, easy to blame just Arjun Singh but surely he had considerable support in his party to carry on the way he did?doing considerable damage to the cause of education?for five years.
Kapil Sibal?s appointment was a signal of change-for-the-better, but the massive opposition within the Congress to his bold proposals?foreign universities, X boards, higher education overhaul?which has, in fact, forced him to backtrack and seek ?consensus? is a sign of strong resistance from the old guard. Again, one can only hope that it?s simply a strategic go slow that will enable reform eventually.
But perhaps the most immediate battle between the modernisers and the old guard will be played out in the next week as the government prepares its response to the Supreme Court?s notice on Section 377. Much was said about the new, liberal, forward-looking Congress that appealed to the youth of this country after the election win. But, will the Congress be able to assert its liberalism in supporting the reading down of 377? Early indications suggested much dithering on the issue. Veerappa Moily, the law minister, was forced to backtrack on his opinion favouring the repeal of 377 under pressure from his own party. There is a real and grave danger that the Congress may yet end up pandering to the illiberal views of the religious right on this matter. They did it once in the 1980s with the Shah Bano case, where they opted to side with hardliners rather than liberals. They probably paid for it over the medium term. Again, one can only hope that this time around the Congress doesn?t falter on its liberal core, but there is clearly no consensus within the party.
The Congress is perhaps one of those political parties that tend not to handle decisive mandates very well. From its inception, it has tried to be a big umbrella party?an impossible task in India. In many ways, its over-arching approach dissatisfied too many and the party?s decline coincided with the rise of the others in the 1990s. There is again a danger that in its 200-plus avatar Congress will try to go back to its big umbrella approach, which in governance terms may end up forcing it to make too many compromises on key issues. It?s time that the Congress stopped looking at the common minimum?it has the mandate to assert young India?s forward-looking dynamism and liberalism. The best leaders are transformational?Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh need to start backing the modernisers more firmly.