Is India ready for Federalism?
Is
India ready for Federalism?
*Ravi
Kumar Pillai
India as an independent
nation is about to complete seventy-five years of freedom from colonial rule. Thirty
years is generally considered as a generational span, which is the average time
taken for children born to become adults and have in turn children born to
them. In that sense we have the third generation of citizens born in free India
currently at the threshold of their
teens. It is indeed time to ask ourselves some uncomfortable questions. What
sort of future is reckoning these kids? How
have we as a nation and as the generations preceding them fared in enabling
their ascendancy in terms competence, engagement and quality of life?
The answers to these
questions unfortunately are nothing to write home about. The low score in terms
of Human Development Index (HDI) would speak for itself. India’s HDI rank as
per World Economic Forum Report of 2019 is 129 out of 189 nations covered. Our
rank has just gone up by one place over the five-year period 2013 to 2018. If
we look at the inter-state comparison of HDI, the lumping of the Hindi
heartland states of Bihar, MP and UP at the bottom of the heap is a sad tale of
development deficit. If we take all Hindi-speaking States representing almost
half of our population, their average HDI is significantly less than the
Southern states.
The crux of the story is
that unless we lift the HDI of Hindi belt, our overall story will remain
pathetic. It is in this context that we need to seriously look at the model of
governance and priorities for development that we have been following for
years. India is too large and too complex to be taken as one coherent and
uniform economy. Our regional differences are the results of history, culture
and demography. Painting India with one brush has not yielded results, nor is
it likely to in foreseeable future. What we need is a localised, customised and
intensive model of development where bottom up initiatives need to be curated
widely.
We need to reinvent the
role, relevance and effectiveness of States in the overall federal structure of
governance. The pandemic has struck a severe blow and shaken our federal
governance structure. The comfort zone
our elected representatives and bureaucrats are long used to has been breached
by the crisis. Any voices of dissent or expressions of frustration with the
progress are quickly painted as exuberant activism detrimental to the
stability! The time has perhaps come when the old rules of playing for status
quo would no longer work.
It was quite a spectacle
to observe how in the wake of the pandemic, the political parties, governments
and leaders were scurrying restlessly like the proverbial blindmen trying to recognize
and interpret the elephant in the room. After two months of the crisis,
discerning observers can identify the performers, preservers and laggards among
our political leaders. Without looking at their political leanings, going
merely by the consistency of response,
empathy and clarity of purpose, the two leaders who stand out are
Pinarayi Vijayan, the Chief Minister of Kerala and Yogi Aditya Nath his
counterpart from UP. While their world views and ideological convictions hardly
meet, as leaders responsible to provide relief, order and confidence to their
people they have so far fared well above the rest.
Kerala has nearly world-standard
human development indicators and a history of reliable public health, public
distribution system and public education infrastructure. Pinarayi Vijayan has
led from the front and blunted attempts by political opponents to play the
usual politics of negativism. He has by and large succeeded in leveraging the
advantages and promoting public confidence in the ability of the government to
respond to the situation.
UP consistently figures
at the bottom on most of the social infrastructure. Yet the compassion, reaching out and
messaging by Yogi in this hour of crisis for the streams of returning migrants
deserve appreciation. The situation in India’s most commercially important
state, Maharashtra draws a meek comparison to the two examples. Despite showing
flashes of strategic leadership, inexperience and absence of cohesion in the
ruling dispensation apparently weighed heavily
on Udhav Thakre. The response of
Mamata Banerjee and Nitish Kumar, both seasoned politicians with mass appeal
leaves one perplexed as to where the focus, drive and firmness of purpose
disappeared. Undoubtedly, Bihar and West Bengal with a massive stock of
returning migrant labour had the opportunity to rise to the occasion in providing
solace and support far beyond what they did.
One of the lessons of the
pandemic experience is the need for bolstering our federal governance structure
by strengthening the role, responsibilities, resources and processes at the
State level. The port of first call for issues and concerns of the people of
this vast and diverse land has to be the State Government. The strategic role
of the Federal Government should be elevated to visioning, planning and
enabling the States and the people to
progress towards prosperity, wellness and global competitiveness. The culture
of political blame-game, tendency for usurping power and lack of collaborative
spirit have been the bane of our polity for long.
Unfortunately, the
political history of post-independent India has seen a systematic erosion of
the power and accountability of State Governments to deliver citizen services.
The fundamental question
is whether India is a federation of states in the sense that we understand the
United States or United Kingdom is. While the US or the UK is structured as the
voluntary union of sub-nationalities, the Indian constitution states that we
are a Union of States. The States in Indian context are mere administrative
units while in US or UK there is a clear and unmistakeable individuality for
the constituent units in terms of political identity. The same is reflected in
the structure and practices of fiscal and administrative devolution.
We need to realise that India
today is far more politically evolved than at the threshold of independence.
The States were formed by merging areas that were historically under different
administrations. At the time of forming linguistic states, cultural affinity
was given predominance over economic pragmatism. However, over the years since
reorganization, the newly demarcated states and their sub-cultures have acquired
strong sub-national identities. In fact, the dynamics of assertive regional
identities resulted in bifurcations of some states. The smaller states have by
and large proved effective as efficient administrative units.
In this socio-political
context, the States as the primary units of governance have to be strengthened
and empowered. The pandemic responses demonstrate the need for reinforcing
state level governance competence and empowerment. Assertion and execution of
regional development and social empowerment can best happen if states are structurally and
resource-wise strong enough to plan and implement mission-mode transformation programs.
Let the recent experience
reinforce our resolve to consolidate regional empowerment rather than
regressing back to over-centralisation. States with vision, skills and
resources can only create opportunities for employment and entrepreneurship across
the nation. Regional focus in developing the Hind-heartland states is the only
solution to making the nation break out of the entropy of mediocrity and release
our cities from overcrowding and miserable living conditions.
Comments
Post a Comment