If the country is waking up to the need to restore a pragmatic balance, it is because the Modi Government has put a firm lid on corruption. This wholesome environment has allowed legislators the luxury of actually applying their mind and not being swayed by unbridled pressure from lobbyists
My suggestion in the Rajya Sabha last Thursday that the gravely titled lokpal and lokayuktas (Amendment) Bill 2016 be, instead, referred to as the Prayaschitta Amendment invoked some uncomfortable laughter in the House. The second point, a reminder to MPs that the original 2013 legislation had been enacted by Parliament at “gunpoint” got the Deputy Chairman at little agitated, until the vocal Samajwadi Party backbenchers intervened to say that I had said nothing wrong.
The Amendment exempting trustees of charitable institutions and NGOs from the status of public servants and, consequently, sparing them the onerous responsibility of making their assets public was passed unanimously with a voice vote. Earlier in the session a cross-party delegation of MPs, including some of those who had played a role in pushing through the original Act, had met the Prime Minister to press for the amendment. The PM, on his part, acted quickly and the Amendment was rushed through to beat a July 31 deadline for submission of asset details.
The speed at which the amendment was introduced and passed ensured that there was no significant counter-mobilisation. Yet, a few MPs told me that they had been barraged by phone calls from ‘activists’ arguing that the amendment would emasculate the 2013 Act that had been passed following the Anna Hazare dharna in the Ramlila Maidan of Delhi three years ago. There were a few reporters in the Central Hall who too tried to discreetly lobby MPs against making any changes. Mercifully, the MPs allowed common sense to prevail.
It is important to look back at the Anna Hazare movement of 2013 to draw some contemporary lessons. Hazare, a well-meaning and characteristically obdurate Gandhian with a passionate determination to fight corruption, was undeniably the Man of the Year in 2013. This was the time India was reeling from the impact of mega-corruption. From the coal scam that had led to the government doling out mining leases to their political associates and cronies and the telecom scandal that put the government at odds with the CAG to other acts of pickpocketing, corruption became the hallmark of a government led by a man who was perceived to be decent and personally upright but weak and politically incapable of dealing with the sharks who ran the show. By standing up against corruption, Hazare got tremendous public support and was celebrated as a saintly figure, along the lines of Mahatma Gandhi and Jayaprakash Narayan.
Unfortunately the India Against Corruption movement that Hazare triggered ended by being hijacked by a bunch of activists who sought to ride piggyback on the movement to carve out a political niche for themselves. The Aam Aadmi Party was, without question, a progeny of the IAC. But the political ancestry of those who rallied behind Hazare can also be traced back to a section of the NGOs.
Before the term NGO became ubiquitous and even a career option, there was a sedate voluntary sector that did good works without calculating their political consequences. The history of Mumbai, for example, is incomplete without reference to, say, the Parsi philanthropists.
The transformation of philanthropy into NGO-ism was a direct consequence of overseas funding that came with lots of hidden strings attached. The handling of big money with associated international agendas required skills that went beyond goodness and compassion. Indeed, these old fashioned virtues were not even on the list of NGO necessities that included advocacy skills, the ability to guilt trip gullible westerners, the ability to strike political alliances and, most important, networking skills. The rise of the NGO movement also bears a direct correlation with the decline of the left. Indeed, NGOs quickly filled the void created by left decline and penetrated into areas where the left was singularly absent. Rajasthan, where the left has never been a player, has, for example, about as many NGOs as there are coaching institutes in Kota. The State’s proximity to Delhi’s International Airport could be a factor.
NGOs have created a pious halo around themselves. Moreover they claim to have a monopoly of wisdom over popular demands, tastes and yearnings. This belief in their own superiority and infallibility, particularly in relation to politicians, is central to its larger projection. Yet, it is interesting that in most places where icons of the NGO movement have contested election, there has been a monotonous story of lost deposits. In Delhi, NGO hero Arvind Kejriwal had to strike alliances with the seamy underside of politics to prevail electorally, using Hazare’s goodwill for the initial lift.
The UPA-2 had a too clever by half strategy. At one level it ran the most venal administration known to post-Independence India. On the other hand it generously ‘adjusted’ the NGOs in the power structure and facilitated their importance in a part of ‘social’ decision-making. Thus, there was the National Advisory Council that existed as a Politburo of Sonia Gandhi. In legislation after legislation, these activists left their grubby thumb impression that disfigured economics. It can be said that NGO’s inspired legislation in different fields has negatively affected GDP growth by as much as 1.5 per cent annually.
If the country is waking up to the need to restore a pragmatic balance, it is because the Narendra Modi Government —for all its other shortcomings, has put a firm lid on corruption. This wholesome environment has allowed legislators the luxury of actually applying their mind and not being swayed by unbridled pressure from lobbyists. In 2013, the government capitulated shamefully to activists who have no real responsible stake in the country. The reason was the government’s loss of moral authority. Once that authority has been recovered, the desire for change will be pragmatic and workable.
In the next 30 months, the Government will have to undertake many more prayaschitta legislations to undo earlier bouts of grandstanding.
