May 28, 2015
New Delhi: Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said that he has consciously avoided choosing a "populist course" and had instead opted for a "more difficult path" of correcting the defective government machinery.
May 28, 2015
New Delhi: Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said that he has consciously avoided choosing a "populist course" and had instead opted for a "more difficult path" of correcting the defective government machinery.
Looking back at his one year in office, Modi, when asked if there was something which he could have done differently, said that he had two options.
"One option was to do things methodically to mobilize the government machinery, correct the many defects and ills which had crept into the system, so as to provide long term benefits to the country in the form of clean, efficient and fair governance.
"The other option was to use the mandate to announce new populist schemes and bombard the media with announcements to keep the people fooled. The latter course is easier and people are used to it.
"However, I did not choose this and instead chose the more difficult path of correcting the defective government machinery in a quiet and methodical way. If I had chosen the populist course, it would have been a breach of the trust placed in me by the people," Modi told PTI.
Asked to enumerate steps that he had taken to change the way the government works, he said, "we have tried to remind government servants that they are servants of the public and have restored discipline in Central government officers.
"I have done a small thing, one that appears small from outside. I regularly interact with officers over tea; it is part of my working style."
Modi said philosophically he felt that the country would progress only if they worked as teams.
"The Prime Minister and the Chief Ministers are one team. The Cabinet Ministers and the State Ministers are another team. The civil servants at the Centre and the States are yet another team.
"This is the only way we can successfully develop the country. We have taken a number of steps for this and the abolition of the Planning Commission and its replacement with NITI Aayog in which States are full partners is a major step in this direction," he said.
Following are the excerpts from the transcript of the Prime Minister's interview to PTI:
Q: Sir, you have completed one year as Prime Minister. Can you please sum up your experience?
Ans: When I took office, the civil service was totally demoralised and afraid of taking decisions. The Cabinet system also was in disrepair due to the operation of extra constitutional authorities from outside and groups of ministers from inside. There was a gulf between the States and the Centre and high degree of mistrust. Foreigners as well as Indians felt despondent about Indian governance. Changing that atmosphere of gloom was a very challenging task and I faced many difficulties in rectifying the situation and bringing back confidence and hope.
Q: Looking back at this one year, do you think there is something which you could or should have done differently than you did?
Ans: I had two options. One option was to do things methodically to mobilize the government machinery, correct the many defects and ills which had crept into the system, so as to provide long term benefits to the country in the form of clean, efficient and fair governance. The other option was to use the mandate to announce new populist schemes and bombard the media with announcements to keep the people fooled. The latter course is easier and people are used to it. However, I did not choose this and instead chose the more difficult path of correcting the defective government machinery in a quiet and methodical way. If I had chosen the populist course, it would have been a breach of the trust placed in me by the people.
Q: If the reform measures are not pushed fast, what kind of a message will it send to foreign investors particularly since you have been making utmost efforts to bring maximum investments?
Ans: One of the peculiarities of Delhi is that the term 'reform' is associated only with passing of laws in Parliament. In fact, the most important reforms are those needed, without new laws, at various levels of Government, in work practices and procedures. We have initiated a number of major reforms. These include decontrol of diesel prices, direct transfer of cooking gas subsidy, enhancement of FDI limits, revamping of railways and many others. The truth is that reform has actually been pushed very fast and in fact as a result FDI has already witnessed an increase of 39% in the period April 2014 to February 2015 compared to the previous year.
Q: What further reform measures are you planning in the future?
Ans: The success of the steps that we have already taken and the positive response of the people throughout the country to our actions in the first year have encouraged us to do even more. Our focus will be on P2G2, i.e. Pro-active, Pro-people Good Governance reforms. Another aspect we will emphasize and strengthen is that the State and the Centre are one team which has to work together for reforms to be effective.
Q: On Land Acquisition Bill, opposition is saying you want to benefit the corporates. You have been denying this and saying that the legislation is for the benefit of the poor farmers and villagers. Still the opposition is unrelenting. Do you think the resistance by opposition is justified?
Ans: I don't want to get into political mudslinging. However I do want to ask whether those who allotted coal mines and forest land, rich with mineral resources, to their favourite corporates have the moral right to question this government which is working ceaselessly for the welfare of all sections of society. I am astonished that even after running a government for 60 years, the ones asking these questions have such poor knowledge of administration and governance. The whole country knows that the subject of Land is not with the Central Government and the Centre does not require lands. All rights relating to land are with the states. The 120 year old land acquisition act was amended by the previous government without even 120 minutes of discussion in Parliament. Thinking the bill was good for farmers, we also supported it at that time. Later many complaints came from the states. We cannot disrespect the wishes of states. One should not be so arrogant as to avoid correcting mistakes, so we brought the bill to rectify the errors, that too in response to the demand of the states. Anyone who looks at our proposed amendments without politically-tinted glasses will give us full marks.
Q: During this year, your government as well as Sangh Parivar have been repeatedly targeted whenever any person from minority community or minority institutions have been attacked. Even you personally have been targeted. What do you have to say on this?
Ans: Any criminal act against any individual or institution in the country is to be condemned. The attackers must be strongly punished as per law. I have said this before and I say it again: any discrimination or violence against any community will not be tolerated. My position on this is very clear: Sab ka saath, sab ka vikas. We stand for every one of the 1.25 billion Indians regardless or caste or creed and we will work for the progress of every one of them
Q: You have travelled to a number of countries over the last one year. Opposition has attacked you, saying that you hardly stay in the country. What is your response to this criticism?
Ans: We live in an inter-dependent world. An isolated India is not in our interest. 17 years without a visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Nepal was not a good situation. Just because we are a large country, we cannot be arrogant and think that we can ignore others. We live in a different era. Terrorism is global and can come from even remote countries. International summits and organizations like WTO take decisions which will bind us and if we are not present in such summits, we may be hurt by the decisions taken. In a democracy, everyone has the right to criticize the Government. Normally, the opposition gets more media space and even the people find it interesting to listen to voices against the government of the day. Ever since I took office, my friends in the opposition have been leveling baseless allegations about my foreign trips. Had these trips been a failure or had we made any mistakes, then they would have based their comments on specific issues. In the absence of any specific issue, they are only discussing the number of days and the number of countries. Look at the maturity of the people: all recent surveys show that the highest approval rating is for our foreign policy. When opponents keep harping on one point, it is a sure sign of success!
Q: Rahul Gandhi has recently got active and raised issues of farmers as well as Land Acquisition Bill. He has also called your government 'suit-boot ki sarkar'. What is your comment on this?
Ans: The Congress has suffered a crushing defeat and ended with less than 50 seats. Even after a year, they are not able to digest this. The people have punished them for their sins of omission and commission. We thought they would learn from this, but it looks as though they are proving right the earlier saying that if con is the opposite of pro, then Congress is the opposite of Progress.
Q: One of the campaign promises was that the new government would take stringent action against black money. Has there been any progress in this?
Ans: The very first decision of this Government after taking office was to constitute the Special Investigation Team to pursue black money. This step had been pending for years with no action and we executed it in our very first Cabinet meeting. Subsequently, we have also brought a new Bill which will combat black money held abroad and it prescribes stiff penalties. Thanks to our efforts, an agreement was reached at the G-20 summit in November 2014 to curb tax evasion and in particular to exchange information between countries. This will help us to trace black money. These are very strong and concrete actions.
Q. No.21: There is criticism that all powers are concentrated in the PMO. Is there any merit in such a view?
Ans: Your question is loaded. It would have been better if this question had been asked when an unconstitutional authority was sitting above the constitutional authority and exercising power over the Prime Minister's Office. The Prime Minister and the Prime Minister's Office are very much part of the constitutional scheme, not outside it. We have made major increases in the delegated powers of individual Ministries so that many decisions that earlier needed to come to the Prime Minister and the Cabinet can now be taken by Ministries themselves. The financial delegation for ministries has been trebled. Devolution to the states has been increased and states have become full partners in governance through the NITI Aayog. All successful and transformational administrations need close coordination across different Ministries and there is nothing unique in it. We have not made any changes in the Business Rules of Government and decisions are taken by those authorised to take them.
Q: You received a massive mandate from the people who wanted a change from absence of governance in the final years of UPA II. One year on, there are murmurs that you have not exactly delivered Achche Din. Are people being impatient?
Ans: The 21st Century should be India's century but from 2004 to 2014 bad ideas and bad actions have affected the country adversely. Every day was a new bad day and there were new scandals. People were furious. Today, after a year, even our opponents have not accused us of bad actions. You tell me, if there is not a single scandal, is this is not Achche Din?
Q: The country is facing an agrarian crisis. The issue of farmer suicides has become a cause of political slugfest. The Government has taken a number of steps to address the situation faced by farmers. What more is the Government planning to do?
Ans: Suicides by farmers has been a serious concern for several years. Political point-scoring through comparing how many suicides occurred under which government will not solve the problem. For a government of any party, and for every one of us, even one suicide is worrisome. I had said in Parliament with great sadness that mudslinging between the ruling and opposition parties would be unproductive and, respecting the sanctity of Parliament, we need to collectively find an answer to this issue. We need to find where we have gone wrong and why we are not able to solve this over so many years. I have asked all parties for their suggestions to bring contentment and security to our farmers. I want to assure our farmers that this Government will never be found wanting in doing whatever is needed for their welfare.
Q: Sir, you have been talking about Cooperative Federalism. As Prime Minister, what is your experience of dealing with Chief Ministers? How cooperative are they in strengthening this Cooperative Federalism?
Ans: The experience of Chief Ministers with the Centre over many years has generated an atmosphere of dis-trust. "Doodh ka jala chhaachh bhi phook phook kar peeta hai" -once bitten twice shy. Even now there is a lot of mutual suspicion between the Centre and the States as a legacy of the previous decades. However, I can say that there has been a good beginning in building trust. The NITI Aayog is acting as a catalyst to build a vibrant Centre-State partnership to take the nation forward. This spirit of partnership and team work is gradually increasing and the fruits will be seen in the coming years.
Courtesy: PTI
