[The Ecomonic Times]

Published date: 17th July 2014

Somewhere, through the unbearable din of television and anti-social media this week, I saw one tweet that plaintively asked why we were hearing so much from everybody but not enough from Narendra Modi at the BRICS summit in Brazil. Our prime minister met the leaders of China, Russia, Brazil and South Africa, but coverage back home was muted. The hysteria over the Vaidik-Saeed love-fest even eclipsed discussion of Finance Minister Arun Jaitley’s much-anticipated Budget.

So far, Modi and Jaitley have meekly accepted a string of programmes and targets set by the United Progressive Alliance government. If India was a failing corporation, the new CEO and CFO seem to be content to inherit a balance sheet smudged by a lot of red ink. We hoped for big-bang reforms. Instead, subsidies continue apace. The National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme sails on, leaks and all. The new government says it is committed to food security – there is no attempt to trim the swingeing UPA pledge to give two-thirds of our population cheap rice and wheat.

Jaitley has “accepted” the challenge set by his predecessor of an almost impossible fiscal deficit target of 4.1 per cent of GDP this year. Jaitley was like a latter-day Abhimanyu lost in a chakravyuha of the UPA’s making. He was ready to do battle; he entered the maze with all his faculties intact; but once inside, he seemed trapped by his opponent’s wiles and struggling to find his way out. Given the BJP’s comfortable majority, Jaitley could have set out a bold agenda, with big steps set out that had a multi-year horizon. Everybody knew this was a budget for eight months of this fiscal year and it was important to see some very clear markers put down for the remainder of Modi’s term. Such markers were scarce and thin on detail, like the commitment to put a toilet in every Indian home by 2019 and an initial outlay of Rs 7,060 crore for the 100 smart cities that Modi has dreamed of.

Mostly, the budget was sprinkled with lots of good intentions and token outlays. At times it seemed to be more of a Modi budget than a budget of the National Democratic Alliance, with money set aside for Modi favourites from Gujarat like soil health cards, solar panels along canals, ultra-mega solar power plants, a Syama Prasad Mookerjee “rurban” project, and of course the Statue of Unity. More money was set out (Rs 200 crore) for the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel colossus in Gujarat than on women’s safety in big cities (Rs 150 Crore) and the Beti Bachao Beti Padhao canpign (Rs 100 Crore).

The “Namami Gange” project to clean up the river running alongside Varanasi was allocated Rs 2,037 crore.

Modi blogged that the Budget had come as a Sanjeevani (elixir) and Arunoday (sunrise) for a patient on his death-bed. Ratings agencies appeared to warily acknowledge his targets. The tough ones include sorting out the coal mess to increase power generation, recapitalising shaky publicsector banks, speeding up moribund highways construction, and building gas pipelines, ports, small airports, and new cities.

Running through all these projects is the need for a topnotch team of ministers to drive change. This is where Modi looks most vulnerable. Jaitley, for instance, still handles three heavy portfolios – finance, defence and corporate affairs. He had said a new defence minister would be found within a couple of weeks of the government taking office, but that has not happened. How is Modi going to bridge his talent gap? Ten of his 32 core ministers are members of the Rajya Sabha, including key ones like Dharmendra Pradhan who looks after petroleum and natural gas. Sitharaman, a minister of state, is in the unenviable position of holding independent charges of commerce and industry, and assisting jaitely in finance and corporate affairs.

Modi has few options now to bring in technocrats or domain experts through the Rajya Sabha route. He may have also tied himself down by frowning on even a whiff of dynastic politics, and so all but ruled out younger blood like Jayant Sinha, Anurag Thakur and Dushyant Singh. One senior BJP leader says he also “threw out the baby with the bath-water” when he abolished the Groups of Ministers. True, they were in bad odour after their non-performance during the UPA’s ten years, but GoMs had done good work during the Atal Behari Vajpayee government, notably in telecoms and insurance, where opposition within the cabinet was skillfully skirted. Modi has also abolished key group like the cabinet committee on Prices. Beside security, he could have done with quick decisionmaking group for economic Affairs and Disinvestment.

A week after he took over Modi met all senior bureaucrats and urged them to deal directly with him. Added to his penchant for concentrating decision-making in his own hands, this means all his ministers will be constantly watching their backs.

The trouble is that bureaucrats are not answerable to Parliament, ministers are, and dramatic change comes about not through bureaucratic competence, but political will.

During UPA II alone, from May 2009, PRS Legislative Research data shows Railways had no fewer than six ministers. The ministries of Law and Justice, Corporate Affairs and Science and Technology had four ministers each, and Petroleum and Natural Gas, Civil Aviation, Rural Development, Tourism and Youth and Sports had three each.

Soon, Modi will have to induct more ministers – but he also has to watch out on needless tinkering and reshuffling.