Working With His Hands Tied

Of the two most articulate members of the Deve Gowda government and the only one who is allowed to function in relative peace the external affairs minister, I K Gujral, is making the most of his good fortune, globe-trotting in the company of journalists and putting out his vision of an international order to a largely disinterested world. Post-cold war, even the Indian Marxists seem to have little interest in ensuring a suitable anti-US tilt in the countrys foreign policy. Gujral, with his trademark goatee and serious mien, comes across as a man who knows his job. Besides, he has been around for long, hanging on to the coattails of powerful leaders. As a result keeping the various bosses in good humour has become second nature to him. Which explains why I K Gujral has an excellent rapport with everyone from Sitaram Kesri to Harkishan Singh Surjeet to V P Singh et al.

But the other and by far the most erudite and articulate member is not half as lucky as Gujral. P Chidambaram, by all accounts, cannot move an inch without someone from within the government, or without, blocking his path. True, he wantedonly finance. Having got it, he was the first to became a victim of the Fronts multi-directional pulls and pressures. Only two months into his job, Chidambaram gave expression to his despair at the complete lack of manoeuvrability in his ministry. Clearly, the heat was getting to him from so many sides that he could hardly manage to survive without losing his poise. Whereas Gujral undertook high-profile missions for self-promotion, and an indulgent Press painted him to be a statesman-in-the-making, Chidambaram withdrew into his shell.

Chidambarams problems were further compounded by a clueless prime minister, who was unable to grasp the nettle of governance of a country far more complex and difficult to manage than his home state Karnataka. Mr Gowda singularly failed to protect his finance minister even when the latter came in for unfair attacks by the leftists, who wooed big business and foreign investments for West Bengal but wanted to shut the door on these in the rest of the country.

Comparisons may indeed be odious but one cannot help counterpose the sorry lot of Chidambaram with that of the evergreen Gujral who has prospered in many ministries from Indira Gandhis to V P Singhs. Unlike Gujral, Chidambaram is too clos-ely identified with the Tamil Maa-nila Congress supremo G K Moo-panar to be fully acceptable to the other leading players in the UF.

Again, Chidambaram, unlike Gujral, had treaded on many a Marxist toe by his advocacy of pragmatism in economic policy. He has had to pay the price for his deserved reputation for being an unabashed votary of reforms, while in the company of Communists and clueless casteists. Where as Mr Gowda possibly could not be expected to have strong views on such matters, Gujral was too clever to ever venture an opinion for fear of annoying one or the other section of the diverse power structure. Even as Surjeet and other self-styled arbiters of the UF spared the prime minister for his parrot-like avowal of an economic package that would send the stock markets on an orbital spiral while it failed to materialise thus far, they nonetheless snap at Mr Chidambaram if he as much as promises to remove the brakes, albeit only partially, on the economic engine of the nation. Containing Chidambaram makes good politics too. Managing Mr Gowda posed no problems, for his sole interest lay in continuing as the prime minister. It was his ambitious finance minister who needed to be kept in control. Otherwise, the scheming veterans of the UF believed the clever Harvard-educated Chettiar could run away with success.

The foregoing is not meant to be an apologia for Chidambarams lacklustre stewardship of the finance ministry. Far from it. But it doesnt help either to be blind to the almost paralysing constraints on the nations purse-keeper. Therefore, the captains of industry and commerce and the big and small bulls at the countrys bourses need not entertain much hope of a positive budget. They should count themselves lucky if he succeeds in slipping in small business-friendly morsels for them to relish, while he dishes out a feast of pious intentions for the poor and the weaker sections, in order to salve the conscience of such doughty fighters for the peoples causes as Harkishan Singh Surjeet and Sitaram Yechuri.

However, one area where Mr Chidambaram can press ahead without any fear relates to blackmoney. Should he delineate stern and effective measures to meet the challenge from this ever growing monster of a parallel economy, he would be worthy of the entire nations gratitude. Vested interests aside, the havoc wrought by the underground economy cannot be minimised. Maybe a one-time amnesty followed by a blanket clamp-down on the generators and keepers of black money would be in order.

The recent imprisonment of an IAS officer in Tamil Nadu for his failure to file his IT returns for three years should be the norm, and not the exception, for all tax offenders. Given the recent unfortunate controversy in which the finance ministry intervened to save a media baron or a controversial journalist who had willfully failed to file his IT returns for more than five years, it is important to fashion Indias tax department on the lines of the American Internal Revenue Service. Taxmen need to be protected from vested interests, and not hounded at their command. In sum, put a premium on honesty, in your second budget, Mr Finance Minister.