The Ordinance Gambit: Strategy Or Tactic?

All in all, Congress must be licking its chops for seemingly executing a neat political strategy. But there could be some deleterious collateral damage lurking in the shadows. It now turns out Manmohan Singh will have to become the fall guy for having persisted with an ordinance that allowed elected legislators with criminal convictions to continue in Parliament.

For those who tuned in late, the Cabinet passed an ordinance on September 24, 2013, called Representation of the People (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2013. The ordinance sought to negate a Supreme Court ruling of July 10, which said that legislators would be disqualified immediately if convicted by a court for a sentence of two years or more. The immediate concern for rushing ahead with an ordinance – instead of waiting for Parliament to reconvene – was apparently the imminent sentencing of RJD chief Lalu Prasad Yadav (an important ally for Congress ) and Congress politician Rasheed Masood. The BJP – which was ambivalent initially –  weighed its assets against its criminal liabilities and figured opposing the ordinance made more sense.

Then as suddenly as the ordinance was sprung on an unsuspecting public, Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi parachuted into a press conference being addressed by Ajay Maken and announced his displeasure with the ordinance. He called the ordinance “a complete nonsense” and suggested that it be “torn and thrown away!” There was a collective gasp from across the country because this comment was made when the prime Minister was in USA. As soon as he returned, in a show of amazing alacrity, the same Cabinet withdrew the ordinance on October 2. (for a complete chronology of events, read here)

Manmohan Singh & Rahul Gandhi in happier times. Pix courtesy of AFP

What does all this indicate? Here are a few stray thoughts and my take on the entire episode:

* This was a deliberate ploy. It was planned and executed to make Rahul Gandhi come out smelling like roses. The casualty will be the Cabinet members, who are all older than the young party vice-prez. The upshot, as Congress poll managers would want it to appear: the geriatric Cabinet wanted to protect status quo but the vigilant youth forced the change.  This hypothesis seems credible because one suddenly noticed Congress party lightweights, considered to be members of RG’s charmed circle, openly tweeting against the ordinance even before the dramatic press conference (read it here). It seems unlikely that, under normal circumstances, they would have had the gumption to openly criticise an ordinance cleared by the Cabinet. Unless of course they had instructions from somebody senior in the party.

* The party went ahead with the ordinance in the belief that all parties would support it. But, with elections so near, BJP stole some of the television thunder by publicly venting their ire against the ordinance. They even met the President to express their disappointment with the proposed legislation. Public mood seemed to be turning against the ordinance; there were rumblings within other political parties too. Civil society was agitated. Sensing that the mood was turning, Congress must have decided to turn the liability into a show of virtue.

The collateral damage could be Manmohan Singh who comes out of this episode looking rather sheepish and servile. He also emerges as a political relic, charging down the road with a legislation that favoured a venal brand of politics. He is also likely to be branded – subtly of course – as the man who was responsible for wrecking the economy and somebody who now must make way for the impatient and ambitious youth.  This is unfortunate and undeserved for MMS – it's like a bum ride into the sunset for somebody who went through public life with his probity and value system intact.

But there could be one proverbial fly in the ointment – the deliberate slight to Manmohan Singh still raises issues about dynastic politics. This may not go down well with young voters and, as sure as the sun rises from the east, the Opposition isn’t likely to let this opportunity slip away. In the end, it will be interesting to see who and what influences the young finger on the button.

Sir, Your Talk Time's Over...

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, on June 6, announced a long list of projects that, when completed, can be expected to rejuvenate the economy's mojo. The markets -- already enthused by Reserve Bank deputy governor Subir Gokarn’s statement on rate cuts -- took heart from PM’s statements. In an economy devoid of any feel-good news and wracked by a steady stream of depressing developments (low GDP growth, a resurgent inflation rate, depreciating rupee, corruption, policy inaction), these two events were welcomed quite like the delayed monsoon clouds.

But it is primarily the PM’s statement that provides some hope to many beleaguered market operators. In short, the PM has proposed investments of over Rs 100,000 crore in various infrastructure projects across various sectors – such as, roads, power generation, coal, ports, aviation and railways. Read the full press release here and here.

The plan sounds grand and has all the right ingredients to lift the economy out of its current slough.

But -- and sorry to sound like a wet blanket -- market operators seem to be in for a big disappointment. What’s wrong with what has been announced? Technically, nothing. The economy needs large doses of investment at this juncture to pull it out of the morass and the recent declaration seems to fit the bill. But, such announcements have been made even in the past. Like earlier occasions, this time too, the government has trotted out only a large string of impressive numbers, but has failed to mention a couple of crucial facts.

Point One: Who, in the name of blazing heavens, has this kind of money today to invest in infrastructure projects? The government is already highly leveraged and is liable to get tripped by the market if it tries to borrow over and above its budgeted expenditure. The only way it can free up some cash is by cutting down on some items of non-plan expenditure, such as wasteful subsidies. But, as everybody knows, that is still a long shot. Even the private sector is hamstrung, with profits falling for FY12 and the continuing slowdown spooking all investment plans.

The only option left is overseas funding. But, the government needs to use the broom vigorously to clean up multiple acts before a single cent rolls in. For instance, there needs to be a serious rethink on external debt ceilings if the private sector is expected to pitch in with funds and expertise. Second, the government might need to use innovative structures to fund such projects without impacting the overall deficit numbers. (One can read ICICI Bank chairman K V Kamath’s interview for some ideas).

Point Two: Time to repeat the point that was made earlier. Such announcements have been often made in the past but without any follow-up on the achievements. In this case too, there seems to be no clues on how the government proposes to achieve these targets.

There are numerous reasons for the proverbial slip. For one, ministers handling the infrastructure portfolios are not schoolchildren in thrall to the headmaster or employees beholden to an autocratic boss. So, it really doesn’t matter whether they perform or not. These ministers are where they are because of other reasons. They have been elected to power and are holding a particular economic portfolio at the behest of the party chief and not the PM. Or, they are in the cabinet because they are part of the ruling coalition and helped UPA-II to stay on in power. Look at the empirical stuff: barring the ones facing criminal proceedings, not a single minister has been penalised for poor performance. Some have been merely shuffled off from one “lucrative” ministry to another.

Also, as has been seen on numerous occasions in the past, large projects are usually dogged by several problems: clearances, approvals, financial closure, regulatory hurdles. Add to that another malaise affecting most projects in India: the pay-off syndrome. Most large projects in India need to make pay-offs at multiple levels – at the central level, at the state and at the local municipality level. This adds to costs and, in many cases, renders the projects unviable. Inability to pay at any one level can delay the project irretrievably.

Do we have any word from the PM on how he’s going to block these malpractices? Nope. Any clues on how he proposes to give that all-important push to the projects? An investment tracking system has been set up (read here). Will that be that enough? As the cliché goes, only time will tell.

So, finally, how do we approach such announcements? I’d say hold the celebrations.

Too Many Wise Men?

How many men does it take to run the economy? Numerous, going by the number of experts voicing their opinion in Delhi.

The multiple lines of economic command have been visible for some time now. If there were ever any doubts, one had to only tune into the babble of eco-speak emanating from Delhi soon after the wholesale price index numbers for February were announced. There was understandable panic because the inflation rate was nudging the treacherous double-digit mark. But, going by the comments made, it would seem that there were many more people out there in Delhi who knew what the Reserve Bank should be doing and when it should be timing its next action. And, then came the unexpected RBI rate hike to quell some of the inflationary flames. But, instead of diminishing, the decibel level actually went up by a few notches with the experts now holding forth that RBI needed to implement another rate hike.

But, what has been described above is only a symptom of a larger trend in economic policy management. Over the past few years, the number of ecocrats has multiplied and with it have the number the divergent views and conflicting opinions. All this is, of course, great grist for the electronic media.

Here’s a look at the chief policy manager and the various people in the economic management team.

· Prime minister Manmohan Singh: An established economist with pucca Oxbridge cred. Gained respect worldwide for having pulled the Indian economy back from the brink of bankruptcy and then steering it out of the stifling, controlled regime to a new liberal and competitive framework.
· C Rangarajan: Another well regarded economist. The former RBI governor is currently the Chairman of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Committee. Obviously, knows his monetary onions well and makes them public as well.
· Montek Singh Ahluwalia: Another Oxbridge-World Bank alum who gained fame as an economic advisor during Rajiv Gandhi’s time. Was Chief Economic Advisor in finance ministry when Manmohan Singh was finance minister. Is currently Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission. A favourite with the sound-bite hunters on all topics – from the state of the monsoons to the interest rate structure.
· Kaushik Basu: A vociferous champion of free economy, this former don – he taught at Delhi School of Economics and Cornell University – has been recently appointed as Chief Economic Advisor to the finance minister. He is the hunting pack's new quarry.
· Pronab Sen: Chief Statistician, Sen is currently trying to overhaul the way data is collected, tossed and diced, and then the manner in which the decision-making apparatus interprets it. He has also been vocal with his views on inflation and interest rates.
· Raghuram Rajan: Occupant of tenured chair at University of Chicago and a former Chief Economist at IMF, this man has been quietly advising the PM on a number of issues, including financial sector reforms. The super regulator proposed in Budget 2010 – which is expected to supercede all the other financial sector regulators in the country, such as RBI, SEBI, IRDA -- was suggested by the panel headed by him.
· Pranab Mukherjee: The man who, as finance minister, is in the thick of it but does not speak much at all, except to voice the government’s overall concern from time to time over inflation, interest rates and their impact on credit growth and the general well-being in the economy.
· D Subbarao: Governor at RBI, who played an impressive role in launching the fire-fighting operations in close coordination with the fiscal authorities soon after Lehman Brothers went belly up. He is also trying to improve some of RBI’s traditional ways (such as, communication), but unfortunately that is seen as a weakness and he is considered fair game by everyone in Delhi. So, almost every ecocrat has a word of advice for him.

There is nothing wrong in having such a large and high-calibre team of economists in charge of policy management. But, policy direction starts sounding out of whack when all of them speak in different and contradictory tongues.

R-Day Ruminations-I: Crime & Politics

Two stories in today’s Times of India need some kind of response.

The first one is about Sonia Gandhi voicing her desire (read original story here) to keep criminals out of politics. She said this at a function to celebrate the diamond jubilee of the Election Commission. At the same event, prime minister Manmohan Singh rued the fact that the best minds don’t want to join politics because of the unruly elements who populate this space. Both – including many others at the celebrations -- have a point and it is interesting to see how they translate this thought into action.

But, just banning criminals might not cleanse the system of its venality. The rot begins with the way the profession is financed. With little or no accountability, most political parties depend on business for their financing. And, a large part of this is in cash. An accountant recently told me that even new generation entrepreneurs who wanted to run transparent and well-governed businesses – especially in manufacturing -- couldn’t help dipping into the shadowy cash economy once in a while to keep greedy politicians and bureaucrats at bay. Pay-offs are hard-wired into the system of approvals, clearances and licences; denial only begets reprisal and redressal mechanisms are way too effete to deliver timely and meaningful justice.

It all starts here. Untrammelled access to such large pools of cash naturally draws in all kinds. One consequence is the large percentage of political sons and daughters inheriting their parents’ mantle. When large sums of money – held through a web of shell companies in India and abroad – are at stake, most politicians are loath to leave this fortune to a political party or to other political (essentially non-family) successors. Merging the political heir and family heir into the same person is a neat arrangement. Here’s another pointer: nobody seems to bat an eyelid when politicians disclose large increases in their wealth despite not having any disclosed sources of income. One politician even ingeniously explained it as gifts from fans!

If they are indeed serious about ridding politics of its goonda elements, then Sonia Gandhi – and hopefully Rahul Gandhi – will have to bring the broom to campaign finance first. The Election Commission has been trying to introduce a semblance of accountability to campaign finance by putting a ceiling on how much each candidate can spend on his or her election campaign. But, this ceiling is observed more in breach for two reasons – one, the candidate’s campaign bills are mostly picked up by someone else and, two, because nobody monitors how much each political party spends at a broader, national level.

The problem that then arises is this: campaign financing doesn’t stop once the election results are announced because election funding is inextricably linked to post-electoral favours in the form of sweetheart deals, land allocation and lopsided government contracts, which then provides a platform for additional future funding. Perhaps, the EC should also play a role in reducing the size of the government and its capacity to influence business investment decisions. I know this is asking the EC to go way beyond its constitutional remit. Plus, one can’t overlook the additional danger of a megalomaniac EC wreaking havoc. But, some institutional mechanism can be devised in conjunction with other constitutional offices (such as the Comptroller and Auditor General of India) that works to reduce the multiple government approvals – both at the Centre and the states -- that force businesses to generate unaccounted cash.

Many authors and historians have written that the politics of Sixties and Seventies marked the end of numerous Indian institutions. I hope we are able to witness the rebuilding of some of them in this new decade. That’s also a necessary and sufficient condition to end criminalisation of politics.

Agriculture, The Engine Of Growth

The structural deficiency of the agricultural economy as a whole and the slipover impact from the rise of crude prices on fertiliser prices as well as on transport costs for ferrying food items need to be tackled urgently

THE meeting of heads of state from G-8 and eight other economically important nations (which included Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh) in Japan this week got headlines in the Indian media for all the wrong reasons. While the PM’s presence there provided the focal point of all political action in Delhi, the conclave wound up on Wednesday without reaching any meaningful action plan on the two most contentious issues: combating climate change and controlling global inflation caused by rising food and fuel prices. Preoccupied as he might be with all the political drama, Manmohan Singh should also be worried about food security. Especially, since Maharashtra faces a drought-like situation this year.

The greatest disappointment of the G-8 meeting, however, seemed to be the failure of global leaders to come up with a concrete plan to tackle the food crisis. News agency Reuters filed this report: “The G-8 leaders also acknowledged the economic threat from surging oil and food prices…but came up with no fresh initiatives to tackle what they said were complex problems requiring long-term solutions.” What’s strange is the absence of any acknowledgement from the G-8 leaders that the major reason for the rise in food prices is increasing bio-fuels production in the US and, to some extent, in Europe. The rich countries made no promises to remedy this structural issue, which promises to pull another 100 million people below the poverty line this year, but shifted the responsibility to other big emerging countries. Reuters also filed this report: “The G-8…called for countries with sufficient food stocks to make available a part of their surplus for countries in need.”

The World Bank says this upfront in a position paper (Rising Food Prices — Policy Options and World Bank Response): “Concern over oil prices, energy security and climate change have prompted governments to take a more proactive stance towards encouraging production and use of bio-fuels. The has led to increased demand for bio-fuel raw materials, such as wheat, soy, maize and palm oil, and increased competition for cropland…Other developments, such as drought in Australia and poor crops in the EU and Ukraine in 2006 and 2007, were largely offset by good crops and increased exports in other countries and would not, on their own, have had a significant impact on prices. Only a relatively small share of the increase in food production prices (around 15%) is due directly to higher energy and fertiliser costs.” On a more pessimistic note, the World Bank’s note prepared for the G-8 meeting — Double Jeopardy: Responding to High Food and Fuel Prices — states clearly that food prices are likely to remain above the 2004 levels till at least 2015.

All this raises worries about India’s food situation, particularly since repeated studies have shown that any rise in food prices, rather than fuel prices, is seen to have a greater impact on the common man’s inflationary expectations. This assumes greater importance in the case of the urban poor and the rural landless workers, where food has the lion’s share of the total consumption basket, compared to fuel which is either subsidised or almost free. What is likely to exacerbate the situation is the structural deficiency of the agricultural economy as a whole and the slip-over impact from the rise of crude prices on both fertiliser prices as well as on transport costs for ferrying food items from production centres to consumption hubs. Here are some of the urgent issues that need tackling immediately.

THE first anomaly lies at the macro level. Over 60% of the country’s population is today dependent on agriculture, which contributes to only 20% of GDP. This translates into low income per rural family, which then makes most of them vulnerable to debt traps and pushes them into distress every time there is an exogenous shock. The need is to wean away part of each family into skills-based training, without necessarily alienating the entire family from its agricultural roots. The solution is not to provide them with only urban-based jobs, but to create a talent pool for rural industry, whether it is manufacturing or services-based. Such an industrial base, through linkages, has the potential of bringing about qualitative changes in agriculture as well.

• As a result of so many people depending on agriculture for income, land holdings are exceedingly fragmented, leading to falling crop productivity. According to official statistics, close to 60% of all land holdings in the country are marginal holdings (where land ownership is less than 1 hectare). Consequently, the average size of operational holdings is not even half a hectare, or about 1 acre. Average foodgrain yields, therefore, have been almost stagnant.

• Diversion of crop land into non-agricultural use is growing and could be another cause for worry in the long run. New ways should be found of converting non-agricultural land into agricultural land (without actually reducing the forest cover) and employing technology to increase the productivity of these tracts. Antiquated legislation regulating sale and purchase of agricultural land also needs to be updated, with adequate safeguards, to allow for consolidation of farmland.

• A solution for improving the income and the yields would be to introduce contract farming in a big way. This allows a large corporate to tie up with a large number of farmers with contiguous plots. Both win: while the farmer does not lose his homestead and is assured of an income at the end of the harvest, the corporate is ensured a steady supply of output, which takes some of the uncertainties out of his supply chain.

• Finally, the government has no choice but to rise above petty vote-bank politics and take a hard look at all the handouts (such as loan waivers or cheap credit) and the subsidy structure. According to the World Development Report, 2008, 75% of India’s agricultural budget is spent on such private goods, instead of investing in public goods (such as rural roads, or increasing outlays for agricultural R&D).

In short, agriculture has the potential to become the engine for future growth in the economy, but only if the right cards are played now.

Published as an Op-Ed in The Economic Times (July 11, 2008)