Apropos the editorial "Reforming diarchy" (March 6), the analysis of the Sonia Gandhi-Manmohan Singh relationship overlooks the constraints that the two United Progressive Alliance (UPA) terms faced. The palpable relief in Singh's tone when the government survived after the Left parties withdrew support in 2008 was short-lived given the tantrums of the Trinamool Congress in UPA-II. Things really started moving for India after the Trinamool Congress withdrew support to the UPA-II in a huff - expecting the government to fall within months. In this light, it's important to understand that any Indian government is constantly pulled in two directions - towards helping poor and towards helping the industry. Although both are necessary, there are fanatics on either side. On one extreme, there are those who do not allow university fees to be raised for 40 to 50 years, and railway passenger fares for 12 years; hold up steel plants for as many as eight years; and even oppose fully ready nuclear plants to be commissioned on the plea that they would hurt the poor. On the other extreme, the rich and the powerful rule - indulging in illegalities and evading their legitimate taxes. However, the Indian law enforcement system is still so slow that wrongdoers are rarely brought to justice. And the fossilised bureaucracy ensures that prompt and purposeful action is simply not possible. To be effective in this minefield, the government needs to be sensitised to needs at both ends. Hence, a diarchy may not be a bad idea at all - if a right balance can be found between the two power centres.
Alok Sarkar Kolkata
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number
