'Yeh dil maange more'

Manmohan Singh has given his government 60 per cent for its first-year performance. In the Indian educational marking system, that means a first division, without distinction.

In the American system, that score is the borderline between passing and failing. Readers are free to choose which system they wish to apply to this self-assessment, but a single numerical score is not the best indicator to use.

One could go subject-wise, and give a whole range of marks from high on external relations to low on the power sector, and from patchy on economic reform to near zero on human resource development (despite the education cess).

Or, one could go into episodic assessments: two budgets that should have moved more in the right direction and less in the wrong direction, the introduction of the state-level value-added tax system, the stop-go approach to the highway programme, and the legislative achievements""like the big step forward on the right to information.

Or, yet again, one could factor in the constraints and ask whether the government could have done more in the given context.

For instance, has it blinked first too often in its periodic eyeball confrontations with the Left on economic policy, and allowed the Left to dictate terms""even on subjects where there really should be little space for differing opinions, such as pension reform (the answer would seem to be "yes")?

Have the compulsions of coalition politics prevented the Prime Minister from dropping patently non-performing ministers, and those who are an embarrassment to a head of government known for his integrity (Answer: the PM should have asserted himself more)?

And has the "dream team"of Manmohan-Montek-Chidambaram accepted too many constraints from the National Advisory Council, which has Sonia Gandhi at the helm, or has it been a fine balance between those seeking economic reform and those espousing the cause of the aam admi, with the overall results quite positive?

The answers will vary, but at the end of the day what is the good of a dream team if it cannot change labour policy, undertake privatisation, do fiscal correction and prevent the misdirection of public resources through mass programmes that are unlikely to deliver the desired end result?

And shouldn't it be reasonably clear from India's own and other countries' experiences that growth achieved through higher production efficiencies will deliver the greatest benefits to the aam admi?

Implicit in the very framing of the questions is dissatisfaction with what the government has delivered""especially when past experience has shown that it is the first two years of a government that are typically the most productive.

The BJP as the principal Opposition is still to re-gather its wits after its electoral setback, and so the government has the space to deliver more in its second year""if it can figure out how to deal with its own allies and its party bosses.

Another factor that helps is the fact that almost all the macro-economic variables continue to reflect a healthy picture, whether it is buoyant growth or moderate inflation, the global trade environment or capital flows.

It would be a sad denouement if the opportunity presented by this is allowed to go waste. And so, if there is a word of advice for the Prime Minister, it would be that he should back his own instincts a little more, and be less willing to make the compromises that compromise his government's performance.

As with economic capital, you generate political capital too by spending it wisely, not by ducking battles.