Subir Roy: Why national politics is helpless

The Narendra Modi government, faced with three intractable problems (the ex-servicemen’s demand for a “one rank one pension” system, the Patels’ demand for reservation, and the disruption of Parliament), has already capitulated on the first. On all these issues it does not seem to have the power to do what is right and the Opposition is doing its best to engage in one-upmanship. Is there a way out? There is and isn’t.

The pension demand is not just unaffordable but unjust to the vast majority of the nation which does not get any pension at all, leave alone parity. Now that ex-servicemen have got what they want, the same demand will be raised for all other retired government servants, both at the Centre and the states. The railwaymen’s union has already done so. What looms ahead is enormous pressure on the government’s resources with known serious downside.

In fairness, there is an urgent need to extend pensions to all who have a working life behind them, particularly if they are poor. Why should the landless cultivator or the maid not get a minimum pension which will allow them to spend their last years with some dignity? Why should government servants, military or civilian, get a higher pension before the other two get a minimal something? The central government’s pension scheme for the poor (below poverty line), the Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension Scheme, till 2014 had 19.7 million beneficiaries when the 60 plus poor (a third of all aged) number over 30 million. So over a third of the very poor get no pension at all. And what do the lucky get? Rs 200 per month, with some state governments chipping in with a bit more. The whole scheme cost the central government in 2014 Rs 9,100 crore. The servicemen’s demand just conceded will cost Rs 10,000 crore annually.

There is a case for arguing that the 10 million plus very poor should get a minimum pension before government servants (servicemen, railwaymen, etc) get a higher pension? There is a special issue in the case of ex-servicemen in that most of them retire early and so earning a decent pension till the end of life is vital. To address this there is a need to strengthen the machinery for their reemployment. The private sector should be asked to track its record of employing ex-servicemen the same way as there is now public pressure to strive for gender parity in private sector jobs.  But despite there being no case for ex-servicemen’s pension parity demand both the Congress and the BJP have made promises which they should never have and the government of the day is hoist with its own petard.    

The demand by Patels to be brought under reservation and wreaking mayhem over it is as outrageous as the similar demand by Jats. Both are forward among the backward and have done well for themselves in independent India. The case for and against reservation or affirmative action is well known. But a leg up for disadvantaged communities cannot go on forever. Particularly the progeny of individuals earning above a certain level or holding government or organised sector jobs need to be taken out of reservation. But no major political party can take a responsible decision on this for fear of adverse electoral fallout.  

Finally, the disruption of Parliament. It is not just ruining the image of Indian democracy, the very foundations of the republic will be shaken if Parliament continues to be undermined in this manner. Unfortunately, the Congress in Opposition is doing what the BJP had done when it was in Opposition.

Fascinatingly, all the three problems could have been solved if at least one party had taken the right decisions: the government said no to the pension and reservations demands and the Congress stopped disrupting Parliament. But this is not being done as there is a political downside to unilateral action. However, this downside can be eliminated if the two leading parties agree to a common agenda. The obvious solution would have been for the BJP and the Congress to work out a deal and come before the public and declare: promising one-rank-one-pension was wrong; there will be no reservation for Patels or Jats; and no disruption of Parliament.

The dialogue to enable this, by its very nature, has to be initiated by the ruling party and the Opposition has to respond positively. But unfortunately relations between the two parties are at a nadir and reportedly more bitter than any time in memory. The dialogues with the Opposition over disruption of Parliament were said to be non-serious. Why?

It fits in with the cultural persona of Narendra Modi and his team. A desire to be seen as doers and wielding power, centralisation of authority and the willingness to brazen it out are the team’s hallmark. It believes in its own machismo. Also personally, Mr Modi, from his record in Gujarat, is credited with a degree of ruthlessness. His image does not fit in with the accommodativeness that goes with a willingness to compromise. This is of a piece with the ethos of the RSS in which centralisation of authority and belief in strength or shakti are critical. It is the image of Mr Vajpayee and not Mr Modi which fits in with the spirit of accommodation and give and take. So a solution is there but…

subirkroy@gmail.com