100 days too short to judge UPA II: Poll

Video

Click to play video

It's been 100 days since Prime Minister Manmohan Singh took the oath for a second time and UPA II came to power. In normal times, 100 days would not be considered a milestone but several ministers of UPA II and the Prime Minister himself had set a 100-day agenda for governance.

Has the Government been able to fulfil some of those promises? How has its performance been on economy, foreign policy and which ministry has performed the best and which has been the worst. Take a look at the findings brought about by an exclusive survey by CNN-IBN among 100 top editors, senior journalists and columnists across the country.

On the show to gauge and discuss UPA II's 100-day performance were senior journalist and columnist, Swapan Dasgupta; Delhi Editor Telegraph, Manini Chatterjee; Associate Editor The Hindu, Siddharth Varadarajan; columnist and senior journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta; Editor Loksatta in Mumbai, Kumar Ketkar.

Overall efficiency of UPA II in 100 days

Not a single journalist who participated in the survey thought UPA II's performance had been excellent.

A Government, which has been the first ever in 20 years to come close to getting a majority, should have got a much better mandate from editors and journalists across the country. The honeymoon effect seems to have gone.

Swapan Dasgupta began the discussion by saying, “I think a part of it is because when someone gets a majority, you expect them to do something dramatic. It's been a very long time since someone had a political position as comfortable as the UPA II. Under such circumstances, the performance of the Government has been not disastrous but underwhelming. I think that is what has been reflected in your survey by-and-large that it is an average kind of a performance.”

He felt that there should never have been that expectation thrown in that in 100 days things will change drastically because India is not a country where things happen in 100 days.

Manini Chatterjee, disagreeing with Dasgupta said, “I think the very fact that it has been a slow and steady start is the best thing that could have happened. Anything spectacular that would have happened in the first 100 days then expectations rise too much. After all, they are going to be here for the next five years and an above average rating is the best for them. I think it is good news for the Government that they have got this rating.”

Thakurta said that he agreed with Manini. He said that there was just too much hype around the 100 day figure - not just by the Indian media but also by foreign media.

“The Newsweek, when Manmohan Singh came to power got him on the cover and gave a headline - 'Singh's 100-day agenda could change the world'. Please let's be clear that 100 days is nothing. Manmohan Singh had just said that they will set up a kind of a gameplan in 100 days. I would say the honeymoon period is still on,” Thakurta said.

Varadarajan said here that the Government was one that people definitely trusted and the performance had received a B+ grade.

"In my book, a B+ grade is not bad at all. They have made a lot of announcements in 100 days and have lived up to some of them. They have managed to clamp down on runaway inflation. All this amid fears of drought and a bad monsoon is good," he said.

Kumar Ketkar agreed saying, "The people have a feeling of stability, a feeling of confidence. There is a good approach to the global situation and even to the situation within - like dealing with the communal crisis in the country. Imagine if BJP-led NDA had come to power. There would have been complete chaos and anarchy."

With the four panelists agreeing, Swapan Dasgupta was left in minority. He defended his stance by saying, "When your opponent gets a D grade and you get a B+ grade, you may look good. We may not be on top of things like the crisis created by the drought but yes, the UPA II has managed to give a feeling that there is a stable Government at the Centre. The fact that there is a regime which may be able to tackle some of the nation's problems is to many minds, a sense of reassurance."

UPA II: Reviving the economy

Thakurta said that initially the Government was in a state of denial about the drought. "It was unsure of how bad the drought could get. Once they realised that in nearly half the country, the rainfall had been deficient, they decided to get their act together. Pranab Mukherjee has increased the deficit spending, he has gone the whole hog in increasing agriculture financing etc, but the biggest failure has been their inability to control the prices of food," he stated.

Varadarajan interrupted saying, "If you disaggregate the performance of the Government on the drought and food front, I think the performance of the Finance Ministry has been fairly good. Agriculture has been a weak spot as well as the failure to dovetail some of the good schemes. NREGA should have been very quick off the bat to deal with some of the drought related situations in rural areas."

It seems as if Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar has been a bad bet for he has simply failed to respond to the challenge of the agriculture situation in the country and in this season of droughts and rising prices, that is more than evident.

Ketkar said that before this no had ever accused Sharad Pawar of failure but that the waves of discontent had become evident now.

"Now we even see people in his own party are beginning to say things against him. People in general and farmers in particular have started saying that Sharad Pawar is singularly responsible for the disaster on the price front, particularly where sugar and toor daal are concerned. I would not say Pawar is the only person responsible for this but the point is that this feeling is growing in Maharashtra. Today, Sharad Pawar - the icon for even non-NCP people - is being seen as a villain and that is a setback for both him and the NCP," he added.

Manini Chatterjee agreed saying, "The impression has taken hold that somehow Sharad Pawar is personally responsible for mismanaging the crisis. However, if Congress is playing politics with an ally and in the process it loses Maharashtra, it will have a huge negative psychological impact on Congress and a big positive psychological impact on BJP-Shiv Sena. I think it is important that the Congress and UPA act together and not make it a Sharad Pawar versus Congress battle."

Swapan Dasgupta interrupted here saying, "The Government seems to be spending its way through the recession unmindful of the deficit and thus it has got an approval rating and even the stock markets seem to be responding quite positively."

UPA II: Handling of security in India

There was feeling that Manmohan Singh was a better foreign minister than prime minister in UPA I, but after the Balochistan blunder in Sharm el-Sheikh, there is a feeling that foreign affairs has become the PM's Achilles Heel, especially with SM Krishna as Minister of External Affairs.

Varadarajan said, "The way in which the Sharm el-Sheikh narrative played out has definitely weakened him. What began as an exercise in flexibility in dealing with Pakistan and not getting boxed into a dead end has turned the other way. I think the next year whatever the PM may wish to do internationally, you are likely to see all concerned Indian officials walking on eggshells. Sharm el-Sheikh was too early not in having a viable strategy to deal with Pakistan but it was too early from the point of view of not having created the necessary public opinion. The Prime Minister should have prepared the ground before going to Sharm el-Sheikh."

Dasgupta disagreed saying it was a little more different than that. "If the Prime Minister feels - and he has every right to do so - that we should go in for a different approach with Pakistan, and that the old policies are not reaping any rewards and if Sharm el-Sheikh was meant to signal a possible way out of that then he should have stuck to his guns - especially if he felt that he was doing something for the national interest. It's the inconsistency which has harmed them more."

It seems as if Manmohan Singh has not been able to carry on the party as far as contentious issues are concerned.

However, Manini disagreed saying that she did not feel that the Prime Minister had backtracked in any way. "He has caliberated it a bit to explain that it was not a sell out in Pakistan, the way analysts and some sections of the media portrayed Sharm el-Sheikh as. He is a loner, he doesn't have the party with him in the beginning and he doesn't have the public opinion with him at first. He starts alone and then builds a consensus and that has been his track record."

Thakurta agreed with Manini. "One way Manmohan Singh believes he will go down in history will be if he goes that extra mile with Pakistan," he said.

Dasgupta interrupted here saying, "The desire to be in history books should not be the prime consideration of the country's top official."

The Naxal threat

In comparison to Shivraj Patil, P Chidambaram really stands out as the iron man of India. He's being very tough on terror.

Ketkar said that post-26/11 Chidambaram was being seen as welcome change, expecially in Mumbai. "He is being seen as pro-active, a man who takes actual concerns in the right spirit and does not hype the concern too much. I don't think you can even compare Shivraj Patil - who was completely non-active - to Chidambaram. I think going that extra mile by the Prime Minister with Pakistan should be welcomed. I think going that extra mile in an otherwise hostile environment along with Chidambaram's pro-active steps sends a correct signal."

"I don't think it was a Camp David kind of a surrender at Sharm el-Sheikh and nor do I think Chidambaram is truly being appreciated, which he should be," Ketkar added.

Today, the one area where Congress was seen as soft - terror has changed.

Dasgupta agreed saying that there has no doubt been a qualitative improvement today. The most important and the best thing which Mr Chidambaram has been doing is capacity building in terms of actually preparing ourselves. We are in a hostile environment and these attacks are likely to happen again."

Manini put in a word of caution here. "Compared to Shivraj Patil, psychologically people feel that Chidambaram is trying to do something, but at the same time, public opinion can switch."

Thakurta agreed, adding, "Despite Chidambaram being more pro-active, there has been no slowdown in the spate of Naxal terror - be it in Bengal, Jharkhand or in Chhattisgarh."

Varadarajan however, said that Chidambaram was the first performing Home Minister in a very long time. "He is doing something in a quiet, not flamboyant way. But unless there are police reforms and you modernise our police force and do away with the 1861 Police Act you are going to have a series of problems which are not going to go away simply by tinkering.

100 days verdict: Educational reforms

Manini credited UPA-II with moving in the right direction on education reforms though she added that more could have been done.

"The landmark of his government was the Right to Education bill. It may be flawed but after 60 years you are promising free and compulsory education which is huge thing for a country where traditionally castes have been kept out of education system. Though Arjun Singh was the villain in media the expansion in higher education actually took place in UPA I. The expansion of IITs and IIMs that took place were not seen since the time of Nehru. Arjun Singh’s programmes got bogged down in quotas," she said.

"Any sensible Indian will agree that much needs to be done to improve our education system. State has a very important role to play in education. If at all Kapil Sibal is to be faulted then it is that he has so far emphasised on secondary and higher education and not on primary education, the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan etc," added Thakurta.

Dasgupta merely said that it was too early to judge the government saying that to education in 100 days was not possible.

Manini added that some times mere announcement, too, made a great deal of difference.

"There was a racket going on in a lot of things like deemed universities and regulatory bodies. I think announcements are important," she said.

100 days verdict: Judicial and administrative reforms

Judicial reforms have not been through political debate and legislations but through public pressure forcing judges to declare their assets.

Vardarajan cautioned that judicial reforms if not implemented fast would lead to further decay of the system.

"The decision of Supreme Court judges to declare their assets is to stave off any legislation. When you look at the functioning of the overall system, the pendency of cases, the long delays… look at the judgement on Office of Profit. It came after two years of the arguments being heard. There are no signs that the government considers police reforms or major reforms in judiciary a priority," he said.

Best and worst ministers

There is no Left in the government but two critical ministries dealing with reforms are among the worst performing ministries. It seems that reform does not come instinctively to this government.

During the first term of UPA the Left was blamed whenever reforms were stalled. But now there is no Left and barring Mamata Banerjee there is no one who will stall reforms.

"After the recession everyone is of the opinion that privatisation is not always good. So everyone is going slow," Manini said.

Varadarajan said that Pranab was doing a good job and not repeating the mistake committed by his predecessors.

"He is probably going about disinvestment in a better way. There was a lot of corruption in disinvestment during the NDA rule," said Varadarajan.

Thakurta was surprised that Telecom Minister A Raja was not among the worst performing ministers.

"Raja is not among the three worst ministers. There has been a huge controversy over him in the past. He is still waffling over the sale of 3G spectrum," he pointed out.

Dasgupta said, "Surface transport does not figure in the poll. During UPA-I the entire road and surface transport reforms had come to a stand still. It has been now revived. To me it is an important step."

Manini said that ministers which were not considered important earlier were now in the limelight.

"In UPA-II three ministers – Kapil Sibal, Jairam Ramesh and Kamal Nath – were given what in the old days were not considered high profile ministries. But for this government these areas are very important. The fourth is health," she said.

"I won’t say honeymoon but people have now come to accept Manmohan Singh as someone who goes about doing his job. It is now a stable relationship," she added.

"After the nuclear deal where we saw Manmohan Singh at his assertive best, I think he has gone back to his normal self," said Thakurta.

Varadrajan claimed that Manmohan Singh was now a more confident leader.

"Prime Minister is much more confident and dominant. I don’t see much interference from the party and the working relationship is fairly healthy," he said.

Dasgupta concluded the debate saying that Manmohan must maintain his clean image.

"I think the main thing Manmohan has is the enormous amount of trust that the electorate put in him as a decent person, as a sincere person. His entire project will depend if he can have these two attributes with him. The moment any of them snaps, I think we are headed for a crisis," he said.

More on IBNLive Right Now

MOST SHARED

• Nude photo gets Poonam Pandey trending on Twitter
• Poonam Pandey strips for Shah Rukh's KKR win
• Tweets: Aamir's 'Satyamev Jayate', episode 4

PHOTOGALLERY