Why Kamal Haasan cannot succeed in politics

Success in one field does not guarantee success in other fields. Expertise in one vocation cannot automatically become expertise in another. Despite this truism, many successful actors in Tamil Nadu drift into politics optimistically.

Kamal Haasan has done the same thing. Does he have what it takes to excel in politics? I was listening to his debate with Smriti Irani in a television channel yesterday and got convinced that the probability of his success in his new avatar as a politician is almost zero.

Binary rules do not operate in the political jungle. Successful politicians do not give a definitive yes or no answer to any question. They are required to provide convoluted and long answers even to simple questions. This unfailingly provides an opportunity to wriggle out of any unforeseen contretemps. Yes or no answer does not enable one to come up with statements like 'this is not what I meant' or 'the media misreported what I said' if and when subsequent circumstances demand backtracking. Such circumstances are very common in politics.

In a way, Kamal Haasan was unlucky to be pitted against Smriti Irani who is a seasoned politician with a masterful play on words. She is capable of saying something and immediately thereafter proving that she never said such a thing. In contrast, Kamal Haasan came out as a babe in the political woods.

The actor has another problem. Oral articulation helps in politics. Somehow he is very economical with words in political conversations and is unable to put across his ideas convincingly and with clarity. Perhaps clarity of expression is constrained by inadequate clarity of thought.

Saving Economics from Politics

An editorial appeared in The Hindu on November 30th which is reproduced here.

                                                                   Number Theory

"The larger lessons from the GDP back series must not be clouded by a political slugfest"

"Backcasting, or reworking past national accounts statistics based on the latest base year, is a regular exercise that governments carry out. Mainly done to enable precise comparison and analysis, it is a difficult exercise prone to contestation as it involves the inclusion of newer data sources, exclusion of outdated ones and making some subjective assumptions in the process. Throw in the political element, and GDP backcasting can become a controversial exercise, as it has now become in the case of the release of back series data from 2005-06 to 2011-12, the new base year. The data computed by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) and released by the Niti Aayog show that India never really grew in double-digits in 2010-11, nor was it the high-growth economy in the five years preceding this as earlier thought to be. It so happens that this period covers the two terms of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government, and the new data have predictably set off a political storm. The Congress may feel aggrieved as its biggest achievement, of taking India on the high GDP growth path, has come under question. During earlier instances of backcasting of GDP data, the political environment was not as deeply polarised as it is now, and so the exercise remained more academic.

The danger in the political slugfest now is that the many valuable insights that can be gleaned from the data will be lost sight of. The biggest of these is that India never really decoupled from the global economy during the years of the financial crisis (2008-10), unlike what was earlier believed. The new back series data show a much lower growth rate. This is an important learning for policymakers, going forward. Any criticism of the data has to take into account the fact that it has been generated by a thoroughly professional organisation, the CSO, and the methods have been scrutinised by experts, including past chief statisticians, and the Advisory Committee on National Accounts Statistics. Certainly, the release of the back series by the Niti Aayog goes against convention and is bad in optics. But this should not be reason to contest its integrity. The method of computation reflects the latest United Nations System of National Accounts; it also captures changes in the economy since 2004-05. Data sources have also been updated. Experts had testified to the robustness of the method when it was introduced in 2015, even while underlining that the availability of reliable data was crucial to arrive at the correct overall picture. There is little doubt that India needs to invest more in data collection and integration and do informal sector surveys more frequently. Robust, updated data are, in fact, insurance against politicians hijacking what is essentially an economic exercise."

    Comment on this editorial by the Readers' Editor of The Hindu on December 3rd is reproduced below:

"There were problems with the fundamental assumptions of a recent editorial on the new GDP back series

I generally refrain from commenting on editorials and opinion pieces. I recognise that there are points of convergence as much as there are points of divergence between the newspaper and its myriad readers, and even within the newspaper itself. These conversations lend plurality to the newspaper and they should not be viewed from any narrow ideological prism. However, I have to break from this norm to discuss the editorial “Number theory” (Nov. 30), which generated some sharp and divergent reactions.

Independence of the editorial

The arguments against the editorial were varied. Some took an ideological standpoint, while others interpreted the events that led to the release of the GDP back series. I would like to reiterate that my role as the Readers’ Editor is not that of a pre-publication censor, but of a post-publication evaluator. I do get complaints about The Hindu’s editorial policy, which is defined by the editor and his editorial team. I can explain the policy but I cannot interfere with it. It is vital to support the independence of the editorial. The acid test for the Readers’ Editor is how he conducts himself when his own opinion is at variance with that of the paper. Can he be an effective advocate for free speech, tolerance and plurality if he lacks these democratic traits? Hence, the issue I am discussing is not about the ideological thrust of the editorial but its fundamental assumptions.

The assertion of the editorial that “robust, updated data are, in fact, insurance against politicians hijacking what is essentially an economic exercise” seems like a statement yearning for an ideal reality rather than one that is based on reality. The sequence of events since the creation of Niti Aayog seems to point at a complete politicisation of numbers. Some facts lend credence to the criticism of the numbers put out by Niti Aayog. One, the government had failed to appoint a Chief Statistician for nearly eight months after the retirement of T.C.A. Anant in January. Two, it has had a tense relationship with the Reserve Bank of India. Three, a set of data presented by the committee set up by the National Statistical Commission was withdrawn. Four, the Agriculture Ministry backtracked on a report showing the adverse effects of demonetisation on farmers. Five, there’s the timing of the new data, which many see as a desperate ploy to distract people’s attention from the trenchant criticism of demonetisation by the former Chief Economic Adviser. The line between the Central Statistics Office and Niti Aayog is blurred, thereby lending a political colour to an essential economic exercise.

The practice of data torture

If the editorial is read along with the explainer “What’s with the back series GDP data?” (December 1), it is clear that the editorial jumped the gun to grant the benefit of doubt to the latest exercise and suspended essential journalistic curiosity. The explainer deals with the problem of finding matching data for the older series to the present MCA-21, which is available only since 2011-2012. As a journalist, my entry points for understanding a range of subjects have been science and literature. About pure qualitative methods and number crunching, one of the finest historians of science, Thomas Kuhn, observed that “nature undoubtedly responds to the theoretical predispositions with which she is approached by the measuring scientist.” The Anglo-American economist, Ronald Coase, gave an interesting economic reading of this statement: “If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything.” It is true that governments and institutions do indulge in data torture, a practice of repeatedly interpreting source data until it reveals a desired result.

The editorial seems to be oblivious to this caution from the Nobel laureate. Its statement that “during earlier instances of backcasting of GDP data, the political environment was not as deeply polarised as it is now, and so the exercise remained more academic” fails to capture the full picture. In all the earlier changes, the methodology was not only robust but also transparent, and incomparable parameters were hardly used to deduct a number to understand macroeconomic reality. This was an editorial of forking paths, for how do we reconcile the assertion that “the release of the back series by the Niti Aayog goes against convention and is bad in optics” with the conclusion that “this should not be reason to contest the integrity of the new numbers”?

readerseditor@thehindu.co.in"

           My response to the comment of the Readers' Editor

Dear Sir,

I refer to your column in The Hindu today.

Though you are hesitant to comment on editorials, I think you have every right and perhaps even duty to make objective observations on anything that concerns readers. Readers do read, nay even study, the editorials in a newspaper like ours.

As a former banker, I have very often observed that a manager averse to lending ultimately selects a wrong borrower to lend.  In a similar way, though you are averse to comment on an editorial, you have finally chosen a wrong editorial to criticise.

You have noted the assertion that "robust, updated data are , in fact, insurance against politicians hijacking what is essentially an economic exercise" is a statement yearning for an ideal reality (sic) rather than one that is based on reality. In the process, you have ignored the presence among readers of those who look forward to The Hindu to play an effective role in shaping the tone and tenor of economic discussions. Freeing economic discussions from political prejudices is not only desirable but also essential to promote economic development. That The Hindu has done this in the editorial under reference despite the newspaper's proclivity to be harsh on the present powers-that-be is welcome. Please don't dissuade the editors from objective analyses.

The editorial has rightly drawn distinctions between who prepared the data and who communicated them to the wider populace. We should not stigmatise the data because the communicator (Niti Aayog) is allegedly political. The leader has correctly referred to the "fact that it has been generated by a thoroughly professional organisation , the CSO, and the methods have been scrutinised by experts ------". What else do you desire?

I salute The Hindu for its brave attempt to elevate economic discussion from the cesspool of dirty and partisan politics. I hope that the newspaper will continue this crusade despite the dominant presence of carping critics with a hidden political agenda.

Regards,

K.R.Srivarahan,

Rajini enters the cesspool

The threat or the promise has at last come true. Rajini, the Tamil superstar, has now taken the plunge during the dying hours of the year 2017. Will this herald better times for Tamil Nadu?

When asked about the prospects for his success in politics, he whimsically answered that entry itself is success. Does this show his sense of realism or betray his lack of confidence ? He is entering the political scene when politics in Tamil Nadu is both murky and mucky. This is a more consequential gamble than any that he might have taken in the movie land.

He says he will withdraw from politics if he is 'unable to deliver' within three years. This may read like a challenging and welcome statement today indicating his seriousness. In case he becomes a true politician within three years, he will realise that, in politics,  promises and pledges are meant to be broken. Political gutter in the state is now so stinky that it will be a remarkable wonder if the superstar is able to cleanse it in the time period he has given himself.

A new party will be formed and it will contest all the 234 seats for the Legislative Assembly. In the normal course the election should take place in 2021. Money power has become the most critical indicator of success in Tamil Nadu politics. How does Rajini plan to raise the necessary resources for this Herculean task? If he is able to do this, he will become beholden to the benefactors and the present venal state of politics will continue. Catch 22 situation !

Rajini's plans are already showing signs of contradiction. He has given himself three years to deliver and the first real challenge will appear only in 2021 ! It is of course possible that state elections may get advanced in view of unstable political situation prevailing now. Kamal Hassan's ever-indeterminate plan to make a foray into politics may introduce some more interesting uncertainty.

Rajini uses Lord Krishna's metaphor to claim that he makes his political avatar to rid politics of adharma. Does he similarly possess the optimal blend of integrity, guile and foresight to steer the state in the right direction? Only time will tell.

Is Indian politics irredeemable?

Indians have a lot to worry about. Not a day passes without some terrorist attacks in Jammu and Kashmir. The Maoists keep quiet for a long time and then suddenly butcher scores of policemen as if they have to make up for their long inactivity. Actually they are spending their inactive times planning what bloodshed to commit next and how. Drought is staring at us in many parts of south India.

On top of all these miseries, our politics continues to be murky. Lalu Prasad is commanded by a criminal cooling his heels in prison regarding how to manage the police. The 'honest' chief-minister Arvind Kejriwal is alleged to have taken a bribe of Rs.2 crore. This, even if true, is only a pittance by current standards. Election Commission is sought to be bribed for favourable allotment of election symbol. The price was stated to be Rs.50 crore.

Indians would certainly assert that politicians are the least trust-worthy among all professionals. How long are we to put up with this mockery?

Cricket and politics

Some cricket enthusiasts look askance at the victory of Indian team over Australia in the cricket test match played recently. They pooh-pooh India's win as one facilitated by intentionally prepared turning pitch. This is not cricket, according to them. Their contention is that cricket has to be played on a fast-paced pitch only. They do not recognise the fact that as per globally accepted cricket rules, the home team has the right to decide on the kind of pitch to be prepared, the only rider being that it has to be playable.

Some of these critics take exception to Virat Kohli's men getting aggressive. They forget that the Aussies are the originators of sledging and therefore it is par for the Indian team to be on the offensive. Their argument is that the gentleman's game should remain as such. Their blinkers can spot the deviations of the Indian team only. In brief, different rules apply to different teams.

A similar drama is being played out in the political arena also. Self-styled secularists question the credentials of Yogi Adityanath to become the chief minister of the most populous state in India. They ask, what has democracy come to? It matters little for them that Adityanath is the most popular BJP leader in U P and this party has won a humongous majority in the polls. If this is not democracy, it is difficult to fathom what is. The next argument is that he spews venom against a minority community.

On becoming the chief minister, Yogi Adityanath assured that he would faithfully serve all sections of people. Critics wonder how a leopard can change its spots. Whenever a jailed terrorist tenders a half-apology, the same critics want the terrorist to be released for has he not turned over a new leaf? So, you should trust a terrorist but you cannot trust the chief minister because the latter is calling your electoral bluff.

Rules framed by the spurious secularists are funny. If you pamper a community for garnering votes, you are deemed secular. If you dare to demand equality of all, you are a rabid communalist. If you plead for disintegration of the country, we will appreciate your parrhesia. If you speak against blatant discrimination, you will be accused of misusing freedom of speech.

Backops back in the news

Subramanian Swamy has once again flagged the issue of credibility of the Gandhi-Nehru family. In several documents relating to a U.K.private firm, Rahul Gandhi who held 65% share in the company was shown as a British citizen though its Memorandum of Association named him as an Indian. Was it a mistake or did Rahul Gandhi become a British citizen for some time or was it a ruse to achieve something or get over some difficulty? Only Rahul Gandhi can clarify. But he has every right not to incriminate himself!

Following news appeared in 2012:

“Janata Party President Dr. Subramanian Swamy has alleged that Rahul Gandhi owned a private firm Back-Ops Private Limited, on government property and indulged in fraudulent means to keep it afloat. Dr. Swamy said that the company had its office registered in a government bungalow in New Delhi, with the registration being in the names of Rahul’s sister Priyanka and her husband Robert Vadra. There are also allegations of Rahul having given out conflicting turnover statements regarding the company’s assets declaration form before the 2009 Lok Sabha elections. This, said Dr Swamy, makes the company’s credibility dubious, with Rahul Gandhi holding 82% of the company’s shares. The company was closed down in a tearing hurry when Dr. Swamy raised the issue in Parliament in 2011.

Dr. Swamy said that Rahul Gandhi’s company received money from foreign sources without permission from the Reserve Bank of India. “The company itself had stated in 2005 that it received Rs 41 lakhs as foreign exchange,” he said in a written statement. ”Number one, he has earned foreign exchange, all the money that he has earned is through foreign exchange. No one is sure whether it is 41,00,000 rupees ($76,271.97) or 41,000 ($762.72) rupees. Secondly, they have shown their registered office as a government lodge. That is illegal,” said the Janata Party President, calling for a probe into the matter. He said he has already written a letter to the Minister of Corporate Affairs Veerappa Moily.

According to Dr Swamy, the setting up of a private firm in any government property is illegal. Also Rahul Gandhi had never made a mention of the company when he declared his assets before the general elections of 2004 and 2009. The company never filed for accounts in 2003 and 2004 either, which makes it a violation of the Companies Act.  ”The company was registered in 2002, but its accounts were filed with the Registrar of Companies (RoC) only in 2007,” he said.

“He has misused the privileges of a government residence. Secondly, he did not file the Registration Of Companies accounts. In 2011, they filed everything and also filed an application to close down the company, while making Priyanka the additional director. There are multiple frauds and we demand a probe into this. I am going to write a letter to Moily that this company is fraud. They should resign from Parliament as they have lied to it,” he said.

Swamy also added that  Rahul Gandhi managed the company’s accounts from Pictet Bank of Switzerland. However, more information on the nature of accounts could not be retrieved owing to the bank’s privacy policies. Sources have revealed that Backops Services Pvt. Ltd was registered on 22 May, 2002 for providing “back office and advisory support services to international and domestic clients”. A US citizen Ulrik R McKnight was appointed as Director. “Here again a violation of rules took place, with the Registrar of Companies not being informed about the appointment of a foreigner from 2005 onwards,” the statement from Dr. Swamy mentioned.

Short URL: http://indiawires.com/?p=13733”

BJP'S political compromise with the Gandhi family will ensure that the Backops issue will soon be forgotten. The prevailing policy is, "Your turn of looting the country is over. Now it is our turn. Mavericks like Ram Jethmalani and Subramanian Swamy will be allowed their say. But we will have our way. Who can deny us, the dog, our day? Let us not lose our venal focus by trying to prove each other's guilt." In any other country the allegations like in Backops will be investigated and truth arrived at.ill soon be forgotten. Incidents like Backops which will be investig

Political compromises

Following news report from The Hindu on November 17 exposes the gap between the talk and the walk of the NDA government.

"The government on Tuesday gave a clean chit to former Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan in a case connected to ‘benami’ property transactions involving his relatives.

Appearing in the Supreme Court, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi said enquiries against former CJI sets a dangerous precedent.

The court however remained skeptical of the government’s stand. A bench led by Justice Dipak Misra said if “persons earning Rs. 100 buy properties worth Rs. 10 lakh, the source of the money should be investigated.”

Mr. Rohatgi said the brother and son in law of the former CJI are lawyers. Besides, the Income Tax investigation has turned up with nothing, he added. “We cannot do anymore,” the AG submitted.

Mr. Rohatgi said the PIL filed by NGO Common Cause was for a Presidential Reference to oust Justice (retired) Balakrishnan as NJAC chief and this has become infructuous as he has already stepped down from the post. “Nothing survives in the petition,” AG said.

"If the relatives can show they have the source..." Justice Misra persisted. But the AG said he would provide the bench with the status report of the IT probe in the case. Noting that there cannot be a further enquiry, the AG referred to how similar allegations were made in the past against another former CJI who recently passed away.

The government was granted an adjournment by the court. The case has been listed for further hearing on January 19."

NDA was voted to power with people trusting its high-decibel assurances to fight corruption and misuse of power. But, NDA in power has all along obliged the venal elements.

Justice Balakrishnan's shenanigans are widely known. But the government gives a clean chit to him because institutions or individuals, one criminal wants to help another. 

Ram Jethmalani gave evidence after evidence of black money but the government is conveniently tight-lipped. Subramanian Swamy keeps bringing out the unlawful manoeuvres of Congress leaders in many incidents including the National Herald case and now the citizenship duplicity of Rahul Gandhi. The government is determined not to upset the apple-cart.

Do we call this political compromise a pragmatic policy or subversion of national interest?

Why India produces more CEOs for MNCs than China

Following PTI report explains why we should thank our government for scoring over China. Had we developed as fast as China, our successful business leaders would not have been in America, Germany etc.

"PTI | Apr 4, 2014, 02.42PM IST

 

NEW YORK: Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella joining the growing list of India-born chiefs at the helm of American companies has caused a "bit of a stir" in China, according to a media report.

The Wall Street Journal report titled 'Why China Doesn't Export World-Class CEOs' also said Indians' good command over the English language and their willingness to move gives them an edge over their Chinese counterparts to get the top jobs.

"Language and familiarity with Western culture are the obvious reasons why chief executives such as Indra Nooyi of PepsiCo Inc, Anshu Jain of Deutsche Bank and MasterCard Inc'sAjay Banga have succeeded in the west. But headhunters also say Indians are more willing to move more than Chinese, who see more opportunity and good pay at home," it said

 

The report said that Nadella's appointment as CEO has "caused a bit of a stir in China, where people are questioning why Indians but not Chinese are getting top jobs in the US."

The other reasons cited by the report are the high pay and advancement opportunities that are keeping many Chinese executives at home.

It said annual salaries for management positions at the director level in China are already at about USD 131,000, which is four times as much as in India, where executives at that level earn USD 35,000 on average.

The report said that while India remains a "tough" place to live, China has become more comfortable in recent years, offering a good lifestyle to expatriates.

"How do you get a Chinese to move to Brazil in a developmental sequence? That's a big challenge," said Emmanuel Hemmerle, a senior adviser to Korn Ferry, an executive search firm.

"China is such a high-growth market. Everyone sees that's where the opportunity is."

China, however, suffers from a "shortage" of top talent, despite its enormous pool of university graduates, with 7.3 million more expected in 2014, the report said, citing consulting firm McKinsey that fewer than 10 per cent of Chinese job candidates would be suitable for work in a foreign company because of their "poor command of English and an education system that focuses on theory rather than practical skills."

Another reason why Chinese executives do not flock to western companies is that state-owned enterprises and private companies are bidding for home-grown talent.

"With so much attention lavished on the most promising executives in China, many feel their opportunities are greater at home than abroad," the WSJ report said.

In some cases, multinational companies also want to keep their best Chinese executives inside China because the market is so important to them.

A downside to being too attached to China is the risk that Chinese executives are overtaken in their careers by the next wave of Chinese managers, many of whom have better language skills and a broader world view."

Parties and policies

Satyapal Singh, esteemed Commissioner of Police, Mumbai has resigned; he says he will contest the upcoming elections to the Lok Sabha. He also says he has offers from AAP and BJP and that he will soon choose one of these two. Earlier, Uttam Kobhragade, the influential father of Devyani Khobragade had also said he has offers from quite a few political parties.

Do these instances mean that political parties cannot be distinguished based on their policies? Can we cynically say parties don't have policies; they only have privileges? Is this what politics is supposed to be?

Lalu Prasad's discovery

Arvind Kejriwal has taken charge as Delhi's chief minister with delirious support of the public. He is seen to be a game changer in India's dirty politics. Narendra Modi is touring the country and attracting vast crowds wherever he goes. Are they relevant in present circumstances? Lalu Prasad has given his expert opinion:

"MUZAFFARNAGAR: Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) chief Lalu Prasad Yadav on Sunday said Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief Arvind Kejriwal are no match to Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi. 

Lalu assessed that Arvind Kejriwal and Narendra Modi is nothing in front of Rahul Gandhi. 

"Rahul Gandhi is Rahul Gandhi. It is the media, which has created the hype about Kejriwal and Modi," claimed Lalu. 

He also attacked the AAP saying, "In a month, people of Delhi will realise that they have made a mistake. People don't know what kind of people they are, especially the people living in slums don't know about their mistake. 

"The dream Kejriwal has showed to the people is nothing but a big drama. He will set the worst record of governance in Delhi. He is no Raja Harishchandra," he added. " TOI.

It is a pity that such a great seer is found guilty in a few scams. If UPA retains power after the elections, we can hope that Laluji will be our Home Minister. Why, he may even be a consensus candidate for prime ministership. Who said our future is bleak?

Aam Aadhmi Party comes of age

There is a saying that a couple understands themselves better after their first fight and not after their first night. When rifts arise, awareness of ground realities expands.

It is good that AAP has formed the government in Delhi. Appointment of ministers has caused the first rift in the party after its success in elections. Of course, Arvind Kejriwal has denied the existence of any rift. This proves that Kejriwal is maturing as a politician since one of the requirements for success in Indian politics is the readiness to deny the obvious and the ability to concoct the absent.

Vinod Kumar Binny left the AAP meeting in a huff and this was interpreted as his disappointment over his non-selection as a minister. He also assured the media that he would later hold a media conference and divulge details about functioning of the party. Kejriwal wants us to believe that Binny met him only to request him not to consider him for any ministership. Great!

Arvind Kejriwal : A dog in the manger?

Aam Aadmi party has done exceptionally well in Delhi. Kejriwal's triumph over Sheila Dikshit in New Delhi constituency was the icing on the cake for AAP.

Kejriwal's post-election attitude does not enhance his reputation. He has decided that AAP will not support either the BJP or the Congress to form the ministry. AAP has every right to decide so. But he has gone further and decided that AAP will not accept support from any party to form the government either. This "neither they nor us" policy leads only to re-election. There is no guarantee that the re-election would produce majority for any party. Further, elections are costly affairs.

Citizens of Delhi have a right to expect Arvind Kejriwal to become chief-minister and start delivering on his party's promises. If Kejriwal reneges on this and imposes re-elections, he will be seen as derelict. If he sincerely takes up responsibility as chief-minister and performs in line with his assurances, any attempts to destabilise his government will surely be rebuffed by citizens.

If three party contests become the norm, this situation of 'hung legislature' will become more common. In order to avoid political instability, we may have to amend the law regarding votes of confidence in the legislature. The party in government may not be required to obtain support from more legislators than it had won in the elections. Such a provision may make life easier for the likes of Kejriwal and will be conducive to political stability.

Political truth

Sonia Gandhi, addressing a meeting in Chattisgarh, said, "Congress has a history of sacrifice." Absolutely. Congress has sacrificed nation's interests time and again.

Jairam Ramesh: "Narendra Modi is characterised by political autocracy, social divisiveness and economic liberalism." The Congress party had imposed emergency, plays minority appeasement card and Manmohan Singh is a silent witness to looting of nation's resources by corrupt elements. One expects more sense from Jairam Ramesh.

It is well known that ministers like Jairam Ramesh have pledged their lifelong loyalty to Sonia Gandhi. But how many of us know that they have pledged their common sense also?

Rahul Gandhi's emotional appeal

"My mother refused to leave parliament when the food bill was passed ...I tried stopping her but she went inside parliament after a medical check-up... I dragged her to a hospital... She was unable to breathe when she landed in the hospital and she had tears in her eyes. She said she fought for the bill and wanted to vote on it. But she could not." This is Rahul Gandhi's dramatisation of his mother's concern for the poor.

If the concern were real, so many scams would not have been facilitated. The Congress party is in such a terrible mess today that only emotional appeals are possible. A party once nurtured by stalwarts like Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Patel is now trivialised by reckless leaders and selfish and slavish followers.

Rahul Gandhi's grandiloquence

Rahul Gandhi has at last spoken, and how magnificently! "The ordinance protecting the convicted politicians is nonsense. It is to be torn up and thrown away."

Why did the government ignore the young prince's views? Was it because the prime minister knew that Sonia Gandhi's views were different from Rahul's? Why is Soniaji silent?

Or, is Rahul reacting rather late? If so, why? Is it because he has started understanding nation's mood? Or, is he briefed about the ordinance only now? Is Subramanian Swamy justified in calling Rahul Gandhi a moron?

Has Pranab Mukherjee queered the pitch for the government by seeking clarifications?

Are the politicians playing out a big drama? Is it a ploy to minimise media coverage for the belligerent Modi? In the absence of good governance and transparency, we will never know the intentions of these sinister elements. 

Row over NDA vs UPA: Modi's falsification

Narendra Modi has egregiously claimed that growth in national income during the NDA regime (1998-99 to 2003-04) was higher than during the UPA regime. This claim is not borne out by statistics recently released by RBI.

http://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/Publications/PDFs/002T_BST130913.pdf

According to this, GDP at Factor Cost increased as under:

1998-99: 6.68%
    99-00: 8.00%
2000-01: 4.14%
    01-02: 5.39%
    02-03: 3.87%
    03-04: 7.97%       Average: 6.01%


2004-05: 7.05%
    05-06: 9.48%
    06-07: 9.57%
    07-08: 9.32%
    08-09: 6.72%      Average: 8.43%


2009-10: 8.59%
    10-11: 9.31%
    11-12: 6.21%
    12-13: 4.99 %       Average: 7.28%

Mr.Modi should know that we are not living in Russia where they take liberties in altering the past also.

Chidambaram's joke on Governance

Today is Saturday. It is not surprising therefore that India's Finance Minister (I must mention "India's" because otherwise one may mistake he is Sivaganga's Finance Minister) Mr.Chidambaram is in Sivaganga and very likely opening some branch of a public sector bank. He is celebrating his birth day in a couple of days. We wish him well.

He has today commented that there are two kinds of governance and that UPA stands for long-term governance. The other type, according to him, only tries to create divisions among people!

“There are two types of governance. While we are peacefully implementing far sighted and forward looking schemes that will benefit the future generations there is another type which sows hatred and divides the people. They support one group of people, and try to suppress others,” he said without mentioning name of any party or person.

We have reached a stage where UPA has started talking about Governance. George Orwell would be proud.

Is Advani really sulking?

So, Narendra Modi has at last been named as BJP's prime ministerial candidate. There is no doubt that this has the overwhelming support of its members. Advani is apparently alone in opposing the choice and at any rate the timing of announcement.

Advani is an experienced politician. He knows when he is outwitted. Is he so dumb as to express his 'pique' so transparently? One doubts.

Then what is the drama about? Is the BJP trying to create an impression that Advani is the polar opposite of NaMo and therefore if, post the election, there is a need for offering an alternative, Advani will be put up?

If Advani's tantrums are for real, he is committing political suicide.

Jairam Ramesh's discovery

Sometimes some qualities of a leader are so tactfully hidden from the hoi polloi that only some confidantes are privy to those extraordinary attributes. Jairam Ramesh wants us to believe (we do not know whether he believes) that Rahul Gandhi is a conceptual thinker.

“Mr. Gandhi’s style is different than Mr. Modi. He is low key...his style is more conceptual. Do not mistake his low key as reluctant style. He is doing things on ground,” Mr. Ramesh said.

Does the emperor have clothes? The most dismal truth about the Congress party is that everyone in this party feels obligated to make sycophantic prattles now and then. In the process these Congressmen denigrate the party more than the opposition can ever do.

In case the Congress party loses the impending elections, the ministers can only blame themselves for coming up with atrocious remarks that insult the intelligence of the aam aadmi. BJP which is a house divided against itself is only hoping that the public will continue to be entertained and nauseated by such puerile untruths.

Manmohan Singh in St Petersburg

Russian media has started  adoring India's prime minister who is attending the G 20 summit after finding him to be the most hard-working leader among the G 20ers. He acceded to their request for an interview. The media was immensely pleased. The media conference endeared him to the journalists totally.

Media: Mr.Prime Minister, we are amazed at your ability to keep working tirelessly. What makes you busy when other leaders are taking it easy?

PM: I am searching for coal files. I will leave no stone unturned.

Media: Sir, how do you expect those files to be here?

PM: I know they are not here. I also know they are in my office in New Delhi. Since I have assured my parliament that I will search everywhere to retrieve the missing files I am searching here also.

Media: We admire your respect for your parliament. Yet we feel you need to search in your office only.

PM: You do not understand. Any search in my office will lead to some more embarrassing files. I have no right to cause embarrassment to my leader.

Media: Will your leader not be offended by your admission that the missing files are in your office?

PM: Only my leader advised me to keep the files safely.

Media: Sir, strange things are happening in your country. It appears the CBI wants to interrogate you.

PM: I am not bothered. I am ready to respond in my usual transparent style.

Media: Meaning?

PM: I will maintain stoic silence.

Media: Your Supreme Court has said criminals cannot contest elections. We understand your ministers including Kapil Sibal are bristling with anger.

PM: My government respects the judiciary. Unfortunately the Supreme Court has misinterpreted the law. In order to remove any confusion, we are amending the law to reiterate that only criminals can enter parliament.

Media: Mr.Prime Minister, we admire your ability to multi-task. Even as you address us, you are simultaneously speaking on the landline.

PM: That is my duty. I am on the hotline.

Media: With Pakistan PM?

PM: Oh no, I am seeking instructions from my leader how to respond to some of your questions.

Media: Are you worried that the opposition parties in your country are becoming stronger?

PM: That is why I am seeking advice from your President, Vladimir Putin.

The prime minister received some instructions on the hotline and the media conference ended abruptly.