Both Congress party president Sonia Gandhi and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh spoke well at the plenary session of the All India Congress Committee, convened to mark the 125th anniversary of the Indian National Congress. Historians and political analysts may lament the great distance the Congress party has travelled in the second half of its 125-year-old existence from the ideals of the first half. But, Ms Gandhi and her son Rahul must be complimented for reviving the electoral fortunes of the party, even if they have done little to restore the party’s elan, and Dr Singh has done well to ensure that the first Congress-led coalition not only survived a full term, but also returned to power. While there is much to celebrate for the Congress, the party’s faithful gathered in the shadow of the biggest crisis the party has faced since the days of the infamous “Jain hawala diary” and the Bofors case. It is, therefore, natural that both Ms Gandhi and Dr Singh chose to focus their attention, among other things, on the issue of corruption and financial impropriety.
Ms Gandhi came forward with a good five-point proposal for political reform that should be immediately implemented. The first of the five ideas, namely state funding of elections aimed at reducing corruption, was the subject matter of a Congress party report written over a decade ago by none other than Prime Minister Singh himself. Like all reform effort, even these ideas of election funding reform may get subverted by clever politicians but that is no reason why they should not be tried out. It would be a good idea for the prime minister to ask a mixed group of active politicians, political analysts and administrators with experience in organising elections to consider which ideas of the election funding reform committee’s report can and should be implemented by the government. Ms Gandhi’s other proposals — fast-tracking corruption cases against politicians and bureaucrats, ending discretionary powers of officials and ministers, introducing transparency in public procurement and contracts, and introducing more open procedures for the exploitation of natural resources — can and should be acted upon by the government, immediately.
The prime minister too has offered to appear before Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee and has promised action. Instead of repeatedly demanding a joint parliamentary committee, opposition political parties must extend their support to the government in ensuring that all the offers made by Ms Gandhi and Dr Singh are acted upon. This in itself will restore public confidence in the institutions of democracy.
Now that the speeches are done with, both the Congress president and the prime minister must sit together and reshuffle their respective packs. Julius Caesar had divorced his wife Pompeia, merely because she was suspected of wrongdoing, claiming that Caesar’s wife should be above such suspicion. Since Dr Singh has alluded to this metaphor, he will surely appreciate that to uphold the principle, he would have to undertake a wholesale recasting of his Council of Ministers and of key functionaries in government. The taint of the suspicion of wrongdoing attaches itself to several individuals in high and important places. They must go. Congress persons and officials of known integrity should be properly rewarded and those with a negative public image should be disempowered. Neither should shy away from such action. If men of competence and integrity, irrespective of age, region, religion or caste, are given charge of key ministries and jobs, where enormous power is vested and where the opportunities for rent-seeking are high, it would help restore people’s confidence in the government and the ruling party, and greatly enhance the standing of both Ms Gandhi and Dr Singh.
