Right occasion, wrong speech

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh does not speak with an intent to set the Yamuna on fire. But even after conceding the prosaic style adopted by him and most of India's prime ministers, Dr Singh underperformed yesterday "" because he misread the occasion. August 15 is a special day, when one expects the leader of the government to rise above the mundane and to appeal to a mass audience with an uplifting message, and to convey a broad sweep of the big issues on the 60th anniversary of Independence. Instead, what the country got was a five-year plan and its list of programmes and targets. A little trimuphalism, just a pinch, no more, would not have done any harm. People are entitled to feel good about their country "" even if the government doesn't "" once a year. But it seems the government is so scared of the BJP's debacle with its chest-thumping in 2004 that it has begun to err on the wrong side. For the truth is, warts and all, India is on its way. Dr Singh could surely have emphasised that aspect some more. Given the occasion, no one would have grudged him the pleasure. There is a time to boast and a time to groan. Dr Singh downplayed the good bits and dwelt at length on the challenges.

Some might interpret the speech as a curtain-raiser for the next election manifesto, given that the government may be about to lose the support of the Left and therefore will not be able to propose another Budget. Indeed, the BJP could use the schism to move a no-confidence motion in the forthcoming monsoon session of the Lok Sabha, and see what the Left does "" if the Communists want to save the government, they will have to resort to the ruse of a walk-out.

That said, one thing at least is clear: the government will henceforth focus its admittedly feeble energies on public goods instead of trying to produce what ought to be strictly private goods. Thus, education and health appear set to occupy the pride of place in spending programmes, as also urban renewal and the beginnings of a social security system through the payment of old-age and poverty-related pensions. That is how it should be for a trillion-dollar economy. The old question does remain, though: what about the infirmities of the delivery systems? Dr Singh said, "Industrialization is critical for progress. If employment generation is the best weapon against poverty, then industrialisation is the most effective means to create new job opportunities." But will his government do the one thing that is needed most to give a fillip to industrialisation, namely, raise the limit from 100 to 300 (if not 1,000) workers before the Industrial Disputes Act comes into play? Will it abolish some of the restricting provisions of the Contract Labour Act? The Prime Minister spoke of 6,000 new schools. That would require an even larger number of teachers. Where will they come from? The same will hold for colleges in 370 districts, a central university for each state totalling 30, the 1,600 ITIs and polytechnics, the 10,000 new vocational schools and 50,000 new skill development centres. This emphasis on developmental issues is welcome, but some of the attendant questions did not get addressed or answered. Admittedly, all the answers cannot be spelt out in a speech from the Red Fort, but the governance challenges should have been flagged.