Policy moves by new govts must be in public interest

A few policy deviations and non-conformities in the first and the second terms by Prime Minister Narendra Modi might have caused the reduced mandate to BJP and NDA. ‘Demonetisation’ resulting in disruption in economy, affecting small businesses and daily wage workers who relied on cash transactions, ‘GST’ leading to compliance burdens, impacting small and medium enterprises, ‘Agnipath’ that is supposed to have exposed risk of undercutting stability and professional expertise of armed forces, ‘One Nation One Poll’ undermining cooperative federalism etc., were among them. These policies, depicted with hallucination as accruing long-term benefits, turned out to be economic hardships, creating doubts among people. They not only reduced BJP seats but also elevated Congress and INDIA in the 2024 elections.

Indifference to prioritising public welfare and domestic problems, and overemphasis on global matters, also caused discontent among voters. The campaign mode ‘Eccentric Hindutva Political Ideology’ of Modi was another adversary. Compared to the 2019 elections, BJP seats in 2024 are reduced from 303 to 240 and that of NDA from 353 to 292. Congress tally impressively soared from 52 to 99 and that of INDIA (UPA) from 91 to 234. Voters gave an ‘Electric Shock’ to Modi, BJP, and NDA, and cautioned Modi to initiate immediate corrective measures in policy decisions and schemes formulation in his third term. The message is clear: ‘Modiji you aren’t Invincible, but your Leadership is Essential.

Speaking after his election as the Leader of the NDA Parliamentary Party, Modi acknowledged the reduced poll mandate with humility, emphasised need for self-introspection and echoed electors’ constructive caution. In this context, apprehensions of BRS leaders about Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy abandoning policies, changing names of schemes and programmes implemented during the ten years of ‘good governance’ of former CM K Chandrashekar Rao, sound judicious. Schemes, it is alleged, may have ‘Congress party mark’ by suffix or prefix of Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi names, and the party symbol of ‘hand’.

Political parties in democracies do make promises during polls to cast aside, remodel, rename or add additional benefits to the existing schemes or programmes and to formulate fresh schemes (freebies) to suit to the changing needs of people. Fair enough!

Likewise, in the 2023 Assembly elections in Telangana, Revanth Reddy led Congress party tactfully, strategically, and intelligently placed before voters the largely publicised and campaigned ‘Six Guarantees’ namely, ‘Mahalakshmi, Rythu Bharosa, Indiramma, Yuva Vikasam, Gruha Jyothi, Cheyutha’ and positively established credibility with voters. It defeated BRS, may be narrowly. But people do watch cautiously to what extent these schemes will be dovetailed with the earlier ones of KCR regime.

Globally, democratic practices, conventions, deviations, and conformities by succeeding governments, regarding policies, schemes, and programmes of predecessor, vary significantly rather erratically, too, by and large influenced by political, economic, and social considerations. Nevertheless, policy continuity to ensure stability and predictability has always been preferred. ‘Long-term infrastructure projects and social welfare measures, benefiting vulnerable sections beyond cheap political considerations, were generally continued irrespective of party preferences and differences. Policy review and modification with suitable adjustments may be made to align with the priorities of the new government, but abandoning ‘Lock Stock and Barrel’ will prove to be undesirable and unpleasant.

Decision-making on these aspects in democracies is a complex interplay of ideology, public opinion and economic conditions coupled with personal considerations of the head of government. Deviations, too, necessarily occur with change in government to fulfill the electoral mandates to respond to changing needs. Analysts feel that ‘Deviations and/ or Conformities’ by and large have been ‘One of Degree and not of Kind,’ and are to be viewed in different dimensions. Examples regarding these, from democracies, parliamentary (UK), presidential (USA),and oligarchic systems (erstwhile Soviet Union), as well as from India, the largest democracy, are fascinating.

For instance, UK’s Prime Minister for a record term of 11 years, ‘Iron Lady’ Margaret Thatcher of Conservative Party pioneered globally acclaimed economic policies (Thatcherism) and reforms in public sector undertakings in UK. These were followed up by her successor Labor Party Prime Minister Tony Blair, with slight modernisations (Third Way Approach) balancing market efficiency with social justice. Conservative PM David Cameron initiated the ‘Brexit Referendum,’ which was carried out by his successor, Theresa May, and Boris Johnson, showcasing policy continuity despite leadership changes.

Similarly, the ‘Food Coupon Program’ or the present ‘Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program’ in the USA, originated eight and a half decades ago when Franklin D Roosevelt was President, despite subtle criticisms, is being continued irrespective of which party is in power, and remains as the cornerstone of social safety net in USA, adapting to changing economic conditions and policy priorities. ‘Affordable Health Care of Obama,’ in spite of momentous opposition, was continued by the Trump administration by making necessary modifications. But a noteworthy deviation of Trump from previous administration was withdrawing USA from Paris Agreement. Biden however, reversed this decision.

In erstwhile Communist (Oligarchy) USSR, Stalin not only denounced Lenin, despite he being the Leader of Bolshevik Revolution responsible for establishing Soviet Union, but also shifted away from his ‘New Economic Policy,’ which itself was a noteworthy shift in Soviet Economic Strategy which relaxed state control over economy, and allowed some private enterprise. Stalin preferred centralized, planned economy, rapid industrialisation, collectivisation, and authoritarian regime. Khrushchev’s ‘De-Stalinization’ condemned Stalin's personality cult, and stressed on slight liberalisation of Soviet policies.

India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru initiated Five-Year Plans, industrialisation, Non-Aligned Movement etc. Lal Bahadur Shastri, building on these policies of Nehru, initiated Green Revolution to increase food production. Indira Gandhi intensified efforts to enhance agricultural productivity and PSU expansion. In a policy shift from her predecessors, she nationalized major banks. Janata Party PM Morarji Desai continued Indira Gandhi’s basic economic framework. Indira Gandhi in her second term, reemphasised and reinforced the earlier policies on industrialisation and public sector dominance. Rajiv Gandhi laid foundation for IT and Telecom Revolution and initiated early economic liberalisation measures. VP Singh implemented Mandal Commission recommendations.

P V Narasimha Rao introduced economic reforms, shifting from socialist framework to liberalization, privatization, and globalization. His new industrial policy reduced substantially the role of public sector by promoting private enterprise. Atal Behari Vajpayee continued liberalisation policies, introduced significant reforms in infrastructure, telecom, and insurance. Manmohan Singh, while continuing economic liberalisation reforms, introduced significant social welfare schemes like MGNREGA (Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act) and Right to Information.

Narendra Modi continued liberalisation and introduced new economic policies to boost manufacturing (Make in India), digitalisation (Digital India), and financial inclusion (Jan Dhan Yojana). Two significant welfare measures implemented by Modi include the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana and the Ayushman Bharat scheme. MGNREGA, initiated by the Congress-led government, was continued despite political differences. Thus, Modi’s vote bank was intact.

Liberalization and market-driven growth, forming part of economic reforms zealously emphasised by PV are continued by NDA and UPA. In India, the interplay between continuity and deviation in policy is influenced by political ideologies, economic imperatives, and social needs keeping public interest on top. While ‘Economic Liberalization and Demonetization’ represent landmark deviations, ‘Social Welfare and Infrastructure Initiative’ exhibited outstanding continuity irrespective of political ideologies, reflecting the uniqueness of Indian democracy. Continuation or deviation suiting evolving socio-economic challenges, in erstwhile AP and Telangana reflected a blend of both in addressing core issues like agriculture, welfare, and infrastructure, alongside introducing innovations by addressing emerging needs. People-centric and highly popular programmes like 108 ambulance services and Arogyasri have never been stopped either in AP or in Telangana!!! Better, if Telangana CM Revanth Reddy and AP CM Designate N Chandrababu Naidu who are known for their shrewd and teamwork approach’ to decision-making, adhere to best practices and well-established conventions towards a rational approach to deviation and continuity of schemes, programmes, and policies of previous regimes, which reflect public interest.