'Mungeri Lal's Hallucinations'

The full text of the address by the BJP President & Leader of theOpposition (Lok Sabha) at the CII’s Annual Session and National Conference

I am pleased to be with all of you this morning. CII’s Annual Sessionsprovide an excellent platform for political and business leaders to exchangeviews on the economy, the wider policy and governance environment, and theoverall direction of the nation’s development.

I find from the title of the subject given to me, "Towards Double-DigitInclusive Growth", that there is a very significant word in it –"Inclusive". This word has many meanings, and I’ll come to that later inmy address. But the point I wish to make here is that, the mindset of the rulingpolitical establishment in India became inclusive towards businessmen, privateenterprise, and the professional class only after the advent of the economicreforms in the 1990s.

Previously, this category was excluded because, under a pervertedunderstanding of socialism, it was argued that "the private sector is anexploiting class" and "profit is a dirty word".

Those in the ruling party and government had a mindset that believed inthings like -- "We in government know everything"; "Don’t give us yourviews on policy matters, just give us your money for the party fund";"It’s not good for politicians to be seen publicly in the company ofbusinessmen, never mind if you meet them privately."

Without sounding immodest, I can claim that the Vajpayee Government gave abig boost to such interaction with the business community, including at thelevel of policy formulation. This is because my party never supported thelicense-permit-quota raj.

A critique of the phrase – "Hindu rate of growth"

Excessive state control over the economy, corruption, and bureaucraticred-tape were the direct and inevitable outcomes of the old mindset. It isbecause of this that the legendary entrepreneurial spirit of India remainedchained for the first nearly forty years after India cast off the chains ofpolitical slavery. It is also principally because of this that the growth of ourinfrastructure, agriculture, industry, trade, and services suffered and Indiacame to be seen as a country of low achievement.

In the pejorative and deeply offensive description that somehow gained widecurrency, some experts even declared that India cannot do better than theso-called "Hindu rate" of 3 to 4 % GDP annual growth rate.

Here I am provoked to ask three questions:

• Which party is responsible for India’s low growth rate for nearly three decades after Independence? I leave out the first decade since it was a period of independent India’s infancy and also because some remarkably far-sighted developmental initiatives were taken in the first ten years.
  
  
• Which party is responsible for the economic growth not being inclusive? After all, if a vast section of our population and large geographical areas of our country remained excluded from the fruits of development, those who ruled the country for the longest period of time must surely bear responsibility for this slow and exclusive growth.
  
  
• My first two questions may be directed at my friends in the Congress party, but my third question is directed at them as well as at all of you in the business and intellectual class. Why have you allowed the earlier low rate of growth to be called the "Hindu rate of growth"?

  By the same logic, it should be possible to call the 6 to 7% GDP growth rate that India has now begun to achieve also as the "New Hindu Rate of Growth".

  Is it anybody’s contention that some non-Hindu entity was responsible achieving this higher rate of growth after the 1990s? After all, it is under the government led by the BJP, which is usually described as the "Hindu nationalist party" that we Indians recently demonstrated that we can even achieve an 8% GDP growth rate.

I am raising these questions because, consciously or sub-consciously, theword "Hindu" is sought to be associated with low achievement. I am proud tobe a Hindu and I am proud to be an Indian. And as Mahatma Gandhi said, my pridein India stems principally from my pride in Hinduism, which teaches me torespect all faiths.

Therefore, I feel amazed and hurt when I see that it has become fashionablethese days for some people in the elite classes to distance themselves even fromthe word "Hindu" and to surround that word with various negativeconnotations.

Antyodaya and Integral Human Development

Even the use of the word "inclusive" is an unfortunate victim of thecurrent political and intellectual discourse. In itself, it is not only harmlessbut also contains a positive social and ethical meaning. Indeed, I believe thatwhatever the rate of GDP growth, economic progress has to be always inclusive,it must always care for the last man first.

This is the meaning of Antyodaya, which has been a guiding principle for myparty’s economic thinking.

It is equally important to note that "inclusive growth" does not onlymean fulfillment of the economic needs of all sections of society. In an idealsense, it should also mean inclusive of all the other facets of humandevelopment – social, cultural and spiritual.

In other words, rapid economic growth should not lead to lop-sideddevelopment of mankind, as is indeed happening today. Rather, it shouldcontribute to the integral development of man, as is envisaged by all our seers.

Therefore, I have no objection to the use of the term "inclusive growth".However, what I do object to is that the current ruling dispensation and itssupporters, the Communist parties, have been using the term "inclusivegrowth" to somehow convey the message that the previous government, and theleading constituent of that government – namely, my party, the BharatiyaJanata Party – were votaries of an exclusive ideology.

It is being said that the BJP was exclusive towards the poor and exclusivetowards certain social segments.

Communists have no right to talk of "inclusive growth"

It is indeed ironic that those whose dogmatic policies are a prescription forincreasing poverty, perpetuating backwardness, and promoting corruption andbureaucratism should be talking about "inclusive growth". Contrary to thepropaganda of our communists here, the Soviet Union neither achieved high growthnor banished want.

Let us make no mistake: India could break the chains of under-achievement andbegin attaining higher rates of economic growth in the 1990s only after itdiscarded the influence of that Soviet model. And as I have often said fromseveral public platforms, the credit for initiating this transformation goes tothe then Finance Minister and present Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh.

It is difficult not to mention communist-ruled China in the context of anydebate on double-digit growth. Again, let us make no mistake: if China hasachieved impressive economic growth over a sustained period, it is only becausethey implemented policy reforms, each of which the communists in India haveopposed and are continuing to oppose.

I never cease to be amazed by the hypocrisy of the Indian communists. Forthem, it is okay if China carries out economic reforms, but India must not. Itis okay if China becomes a nuclear weapon nation, but India must not.

It is okay if a Chinese leader says, "It does not matter of which colourthe cat is, so long as it catches the mice", but for the Communists, Indiamust follow the dictum: "It does not matter if the cat cannot catch the mice,but it must be of red colour."

It is okay if Shri Buddhadeb Bhattacharya, West Bengal’s Chief Minister canadvocate economic reforms in Kolkata, but his party must oppose the same reformsin New Delhi—irrespective of whether it is the NDA or the UPA in power at theCentre.

It is because of this kind of dogmatism that the communists have beenfanatically opposed to every piece of economic reform – in P.V. NarasimhaRao’s time, in Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s time, and now in Dr. ManmohanSingh’s time.

And everything they opposed has since been proved as a correct and beneficialdecision. They opposed the introduction of computers in banks and governmentoffices, which has led to greater efficiency. They opposed the entry of privateairlines, which has now led to a boom in civil aviation. They opposed the entryof the private sector in telecom, which has led to a telecom revolution inIndia.

Communist influence will be a liability for the government

Therefore, the first thing that India must do to achieve "Double-DigitInclusive Growth" is to marginalize the ideological and political influence ofthe communists, for their policies will neither deliver inclusive growth nordouble-digit growth.

As the Leader of the Opposition, I am not expected to give such advice as isintended to enhance the government’s longevity. Nevertheless, in the nationalinterest, I wish to caution Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh: "Yourdependence on communist support will prove to be a liability for anything goodyou may wish to do."

My second suggestion to the Prime Minister, which too I am making in thenational interest, is: "Please do not fall prey to the politics ofvindictiveness, negativism and confrontation, for this too will impair any goodthat you may wish to do."

If 8 % growth was "Mungeri Lal’s Haseen Sapne", then wouldDouble-Digit Growth be "Mungeri Lal’s Hallucinations"?

Specifically, the government seems to have decided, as a matter of politicalstrategy, to de-emphasise, denigrate, and discredit every achievement of theVajpayee government.

In a sense, this derisive attitude towards the NDA government started evenwhen those in power today were in the opposition. All of us know a veryresponsible person sought to rubbish the Vajpayee government’s attempts toachieve 8% GDP growth rate as "Mungeri Lal’s Haseen Sapne".

By that logic, our present discussion on how India can achieve double-digitgrowth must qualify to be called not just "Mungeri Lal’s Haseen Sapne",but "Mungeri Lal’s Hallucinations"!

Friends, we did not follow this approach of denigration of previousgovernments. Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee acknowledged in Parliament that theagenda of economic reforms that his government followed was a continuation ofwhat the Congress government had inaugurated. On different occasions, he paidtribute to Pandit Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi.

I have myself expressed praise for Dr. Manmohan Singh as a person in severalpublic meetings.

Politics of vendetta will boomerang on the government

But I am sad to see that the ruling party has not reciprocated this approach.The NDA is being constantly run down. Such illiberalism in our political culturedoes not augur well for either for our democracy or for our economy. What I amparticularly concerned about is that this political illiberalism is now leadingthe government to a policy of vindictiveness.

Take the case of the politically-motivated CBI inquiry in certain defensepurchase deals, which has put a spanner in our defense establishment’s plansfor rapid modernization. I need not explain to this audience how this would alsoaffect the plans, vigorously advocated by CII, of the Indian industry to play abigger role in the production of defense equipment and systems.

Another stark example is the proposed probe into the disinvestment of Centaurhotels in Mumbai. The only motive behind this move, mooted most vocally by theCommunist parties, is to malign Shri Arun Shourie. And the only reason why theyare doing so is because few intellectuals in India have unmasked the longhistory of communist betrayals with such scholarship and firepower as ShriShourie has.

Shri Shourie has said that he is ready to face any probe, and I have littledoubt that he’ll come out clean. But I have a word of caution for those in thegovernment: "Don’t proceed on this path of vendetta. It will bite you. Thebarking communists may not bite, but the action they and some others arepressuring you to take will certainly bite you."

Indeed, this entire episode makes me wonder: What kind of government is thiswhich shamelessly defends the worst kind of criminals and yet wants an inquiryagainst a person like Arun Shourie whose uprightness is not disputed even by hiscritics?

One year of the UPA government: Anti-BJPism is not in the interest ofhealthy democracy or faster development

Friends, the UPA government is about to complete one year in office. There is acelebratory mood in official circles. The Prime Minister has given himself 6/10.

Predictably, the ruling party has given the Super Prime Minister 10/10.

Equally predictably, the Congress president has charged that all the "illsplaguing India" are "a legacy of the NDA rule".

But there is something surreal about this government. Not a day passeswithout the Communists announcing that they are "dissatisfied" with theperformance of the government to which they provide life support. Indeed, theyhave given the UPA Government 0/10.

The only glue that holds this strange coalition together is anti-BJPism.

There was a time when anti-Congressism was the principal driver of Indianpolitics. Today, it is replaced by anti-BJPism.

If the former was wrong, the latter is equally wrong.

A vast and diverse country like India can never be governed well if theruling party or coalition is driven by a purely negative agenda. Such a negativeagenda can never help the country to realize its full potential.

To achieve double-digit inclusive growth, India needs a positive agenda builtaround the principles of consensus and cooperation.

After all, in a multi-party democracy where it is common for governments tochange from time to time, a nation can achieve great goals and ambitious targetsonly through broad national consensus. When we were in government, we sincerelyand consistently tried to enlarge the area of consensus on economic and otherissues.

Even today, the BJP is willing to support the government on any reform thatis vital for India’s economic progress. However, the Government mustdemonstrate that it respects the role of the Opposition, and creates a conduciveatmosphere for the Opposition to partner the Government in important nationaldecisions.

Five thoughts for Double-Digit Inclusive Growth

Friends, I did not want my address today on a business platform to havepolitical overtones. But I had to place the theme of my address – "How toAchieve Double Digit Inclusive Growth" – in its proper national context. NowI turn, briefly, to presenting five specific thoughts.

One, both the Central and State Governments must continue tofocus on rapid expansion and modernization of our infrastructure. We mustespecially consolidate our gains in Information Technology and other areas ofthe Knowledge Economy.

The work on ambitious infrastructure projects such as the National HighwayDevelopment Project, the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana, the IndianRailways’ Rashtriya Rail Vikas Yojana, modernisation of our airports andconstruction of greenfield airports, the Sagar Mala project for themodernization of our ports infrastructure, the many initiatives on urbanrenewal, implementation of power sector reforms as per the Electricity Bill2003, strengthening of our Science & Technology infrastructure – all thismust receive strong, focused and sustained attention.

I am sorry to say that the implementation of many of these projects hasslowed down, especially the power sector reforms. If the alarming situation inMumbai and Maharashtra is any pointer, then we must realize that we cannot livein the past and continue with old attitudes about the role of the private sectorin electricity generation, transmission, and distribution.

Two, not just physical infrastructure but also our socialinfrastructure needs similar strong, focused and sustained attention. Inparticular, the needs of our SC, ST and OBC brethren must become our collectivepriority. Faster economic growth without social justice is an affront to ourConstitutional ideals.

Here, learning from past experience, we must admit that the capability ofgovernment agencies to implement social sectors programmes and deliver resultsdoes not inspire confidence. Therefore, I am all for the widening and deepeningthe scope for public-private partnerships in education, health-care, drinkingwater supply, sanitation, housing for the poor and middle-classes, slumrehabilitation, etc.

Three, a big area of much-needed reforms is agriculture.Your incoming President has made a name for himself on agricultural issues and Ihope that in his Presidency, CII will promote reforms in agriculture, marketing,technology transfer, food processing, etc. I am aware that agriculture is astate subject and states have to take the lead. I am pleased that Madhya Pradesh,a BJP-ruled state has been leading the reforms in agriculture marketing.

Four, another important issue is to promote good governancereforms, both at the Centre and in states. I’ve long held that Swaraj in Indiawas not followed by Su-Raj. I understand that CII has recently done somebrainstorming workshops on this subject of state-related reforms. This isimportant, and you must push as hard for reforms in states as you did foreconomic reforms at the Centre in the last twelve years. We need to make stategovernments—the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary—realize theimportance of faster reforms.

In this context, you will be pleased to know that earlier this month weorganised a three-day training workshop near Mumbai for all the ministers of theBJP-ruled states – Gujarat, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand,Orissa and Nagaland (our party is a coalition partner in the last two states).It was the first of its kind for any political party in the country.

While on the point of good governance, I must emphasise that this shouldnot be confined only to Raisina Hill; it is also needed in Nariman Point.Corporate India must also follow the relevant norms and rules of goodcorporate governance—both in letter and in spirit.

Five, the imperative of achieving high growth withemployment and equity has to be a commoncommitment for both governments and the business community.