01-01-2008, 03:37 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Message from Gujarat </b>
Pioneer.com
Prafull Goradia
An honest Government with sound economic policy and a good law and order record can beat anti-incumbency
The return of Mr Narendra Modi as Chief Minister of Gujarat has a historic significance far beyond the debates about his election. Go back to Japan at the end of World War II in 1945, China on the morrow of Mao Zedong's successful revolution in 1949 and India's independence in 1947. At that stage of time, Indian economy compared favourably with that of Japan and China. No doubt, the Japanese had a tradition of technology but then their economy had been devastated by war.
China under Mao's rule continued to trail behind in techno-economic progress. In contrast, Japan swept ahead and within decades became the second largest economy in the world. Nehruvian India could take satisfaction from the fact that China had lagged behind.
However, with the advent of Deng Xiaoping in 1978, China underwent a revolution in state policy; the objective shifted from providing for the equal needs of everyone to encouraging the blossoming of anyone's ability. Ideology was given a backseat with the words: So long as it catches mice, no matter whether the cat is black or white. In less than 25 years, the yellow giant had overtaken Japan as the world's second largest economy that left India little to console itself for trailing behind both the Asian giants.
Jawaharlal Nehru had a vision for modernity. He certainly had economic dreams but he did not have the aptitude of a mega manager who could ensure that the dreams came true. Bidhan Roy, too, tried to modernise West Bengal but the red trade unions ensured that he did not go far.
<b>Pratap Singh Kairon laid the foundations of a vibrant Punjab, but his family's corruption came in the way of his endeavours</b>. Bansi Lal of Haryana, too, made an impact but not a long enough one. Mr Chandrababu Naidu went out of his way to bring up Hyderabad but the rural populace of Andhra Pradesh felt neglected.
None of these men, however, displayed an understanding of what makes an economy tick, nor did they have the managerial ability to deliver the goods. Except for Bidhan Chandra Roy, no one could keep his head above corruption. Mr Modi and Gujarat have shown the promise that they have the comprehensive qualities necessary for bringing about a prosperity revolution.
Entrepreneurs do not invest because they are feted or flattered. They invest because they smell the probability of profit. The first sine qua non of profit is the assurance of law and order. The second is quick decision-making by those in Government and the absence of corruption by politicians as well as bureaucrats. The environment should be business-friendly and certainly free from local extortionists.
The availability of power and water are obvious necessities as are good roads. The State need not do much more than to ensure these essentials. How many States in India can claim to provide them? How many Governments appreciate the value of this total package as an attraction for entrepreneurs to risk their goodwill and money?
Even if some States do, do they inspire the confidence that they would fulfill what they promise? For example, will West Bengal seem credible about promising to make the State free from trade union agitations? Will Uttar Pradesh and Bihar inspire faith about freeing the State from extortionists?
The state can be neither impartial nor fair unless its Government is free from corruption. Gujarat has not suffered from this malady at the upper levels since Mr Modi became Chief Minister in 2001. As an example of clean Government, take the State PSUs which are about 50 in number.<b> After his re-election in 2002, Mr Modi appointed one Kamal Patel as head of the tourism body. Otherwise, he did not appoint any MLA or politician as chairman. The traditional practice until then was that an MLA was either a Minister or a PSU chairman. He was often also an upward conduit of money which was milked from the undertaking. </b>
<b>Another example of Mr Modi's governance was the refusal of the Gujarat Electricity Board to supply power to those farmers who did not pay their bills. It was not easy to stand up to the pressures especially when it is believed across the country one way to remain in power is to overlook non-payment of electricity bills by farmers. As it happens, the two big leakages of State treasuries are PSUs and electricity boards. </b>
When the Asian tigers were acclaimed for their economic miracles, the apologists of Nehruvianism dismissed them as small countries which could not be compared with the giant that was India. The Japanese marvel was ignored on the pretext that the country had an industrial infrastructure that was developed since the Meiji Restoration of 1861. The Chinese success was attributed to its dictatorship! Now that Gujarat has shown the way, what would be the excuse for the other States as well as the Centre to justify their lackadaisical management of the economy?
<b>It is seldom realised that the single greatest threat to the integrity of the Indian Union would be the backwardness of large States. That Uttar Pradesh has failed to raise taxes enough to run its routine revenue expenditure and then asking subsidies from the Finance Commission is indeed unacceptable. If such a large and fertile state happens to be subsidised, the Tamil youth of tomorrow might ask: What does his State gain by remaining within the Indian Union? </b>
It is noteworthy that of all the 60 years since independence we have been governed by prime ministers hailing from UP for 44 years. Eight out of our 13 prime ministers have hailed from this India's largest state.
'Gujaratva' should be used as an example of development by most States. The message from Gandhinagar is timely, loud and clear.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pioneer.com
Prafull Goradia
An honest Government with sound economic policy and a good law and order record can beat anti-incumbency
The return of Mr Narendra Modi as Chief Minister of Gujarat has a historic significance far beyond the debates about his election. Go back to Japan at the end of World War II in 1945, China on the morrow of Mao Zedong's successful revolution in 1949 and India's independence in 1947. At that stage of time, Indian economy compared favourably with that of Japan and China. No doubt, the Japanese had a tradition of technology but then their economy had been devastated by war.
China under Mao's rule continued to trail behind in techno-economic progress. In contrast, Japan swept ahead and within decades became the second largest economy in the world. Nehruvian India could take satisfaction from the fact that China had lagged behind.
However, with the advent of Deng Xiaoping in 1978, China underwent a revolution in state policy; the objective shifted from providing for the equal needs of everyone to encouraging the blossoming of anyone's ability. Ideology was given a backseat with the words: So long as it catches mice, no matter whether the cat is black or white. In less than 25 years, the yellow giant had overtaken Japan as the world's second largest economy that left India little to console itself for trailing behind both the Asian giants.
Jawaharlal Nehru had a vision for modernity. He certainly had economic dreams but he did not have the aptitude of a mega manager who could ensure that the dreams came true. Bidhan Roy, too, tried to modernise West Bengal but the red trade unions ensured that he did not go far.
<b>Pratap Singh Kairon laid the foundations of a vibrant Punjab, but his family's corruption came in the way of his endeavours</b>. Bansi Lal of Haryana, too, made an impact but not a long enough one. Mr Chandrababu Naidu went out of his way to bring up Hyderabad but the rural populace of Andhra Pradesh felt neglected.
None of these men, however, displayed an understanding of what makes an economy tick, nor did they have the managerial ability to deliver the goods. Except for Bidhan Chandra Roy, no one could keep his head above corruption. Mr Modi and Gujarat have shown the promise that they have the comprehensive qualities necessary for bringing about a prosperity revolution.
Entrepreneurs do not invest because they are feted or flattered. They invest because they smell the probability of profit. The first sine qua non of profit is the assurance of law and order. The second is quick decision-making by those in Government and the absence of corruption by politicians as well as bureaucrats. The environment should be business-friendly and certainly free from local extortionists.
The availability of power and water are obvious necessities as are good roads. The State need not do much more than to ensure these essentials. How many States in India can claim to provide them? How many Governments appreciate the value of this total package as an attraction for entrepreneurs to risk their goodwill and money?
Even if some States do, do they inspire the confidence that they would fulfill what they promise? For example, will West Bengal seem credible about promising to make the State free from trade union agitations? Will Uttar Pradesh and Bihar inspire faith about freeing the State from extortionists?
The state can be neither impartial nor fair unless its Government is free from corruption. Gujarat has not suffered from this malady at the upper levels since Mr Modi became Chief Minister in 2001. As an example of clean Government, take the State PSUs which are about 50 in number.<b> After his re-election in 2002, Mr Modi appointed one Kamal Patel as head of the tourism body. Otherwise, he did not appoint any MLA or politician as chairman. The traditional practice until then was that an MLA was either a Minister or a PSU chairman. He was often also an upward conduit of money which was milked from the undertaking. </b>
<b>Another example of Mr Modi's governance was the refusal of the Gujarat Electricity Board to supply power to those farmers who did not pay their bills. It was not easy to stand up to the pressures especially when it is believed across the country one way to remain in power is to overlook non-payment of electricity bills by farmers. As it happens, the two big leakages of State treasuries are PSUs and electricity boards. </b>
When the Asian tigers were acclaimed for their economic miracles, the apologists of Nehruvianism dismissed them as small countries which could not be compared with the giant that was India. The Japanese marvel was ignored on the pretext that the country had an industrial infrastructure that was developed since the Meiji Restoration of 1861. The Chinese success was attributed to its dictatorship! Now that Gujarat has shown the way, what would be the excuse for the other States as well as the Centre to justify their lackadaisical management of the economy?
<b>It is seldom realised that the single greatest threat to the integrity of the Indian Union would be the backwardness of large States. That Uttar Pradesh has failed to raise taxes enough to run its routine revenue expenditure and then asking subsidies from the Finance Commission is indeed unacceptable. If such a large and fertile state happens to be subsidised, the Tamil youth of tomorrow might ask: What does his State gain by remaining within the Indian Union? </b>
It is noteworthy that of all the 60 years since independence we have been governed by prime ministers hailing from UP for 44 years. Eight out of our 13 prime ministers have hailed from this India's largest state.
'Gujaratva' should be used as an example of development by most States. The message from Gandhinagar is timely, loud and clear.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->