"Who so diggeth a pit shall fall therein: and he that rolleth a stone, it will return upon him" (Bible 26:27) It is pertinent to remind our politicians, busy digging holes and throwing stones, of this eminently sensible biblical proverb. Will they ever learn, we ask in dismay? Those in government are seeing those out of government do the same to them as they did when they were out of government. The media is having a field day, gleefully resurrecting clips of the 'container days' to show they are now doing what they said they will never do. We empathise with government's brigade of spokespersons.
Of course, the opposition has the right, indeed the duty, to criticize and find fault with the government. We see that happening all the time in the House of Commons, our role model. Except there the opposition also comes up with alternatives. The government and opposition share the same goals - national prestige and happier people - and differ only on the path to these goals.
Some may quibble with the 'sameness of goals', but beyond the semantics we all know it is the welfare, rights, and security of our people that the chosen representatives are enjoined upon to safe guard and promote. What is 'national interest', and who defines it, is a vacuous debate. The Constitution is unequivocal on both.
In this pursuit of a minimum common agenda political leadership has to go past grandstanding. It is not enough to stand together for the subliminal - showing solidarity on Kashmir or saluting Turkey. The challenge is in the mundane - the tedious business of governance, where you have to make tough policy choices.
Take the economy. It has so many different routes to the same end. Yes, government's handling of it has left a lot to be desired, and we don't need to be reminded of the sufferings it has caused, but we need to debate the alternatives, past the inane corruption - incompetence rattling (both are evil and intertwined; one breeds the other).
We want a more adult conversation, not the kind 'it was IMF negotiating with IMF'. We have been with the IMF almost forever and regardless of who sat on the negotiating table it has been more of the same.
We need a balanced budget that requires both more revenues and less expenditure. There is the ballooning circular debt that needs to be fixed. Losses of certain state enterprises have become unmanageable. Exports are going nowhere and FDI is not rushing in.
What we want to hear from the opposition is how they propose to address these issues. It will be most myopic for them to wait for their turn in office to fix things. If you let things drift, yes it will hurt PTI, but it will hurt you too. Despite the cyclicity of our economy things will get that much worse, if not beyond repair, when your turn comes.
We know documentation is neither easy nor pain-free. But between the FATF dragon and the fiscal albatross what room for manoeuvre does the opposition see? If the issue is with the speed of it how can they slow it down without missing the target?
Inflation is without doubt the devil incarnate, the most pernicious of taxes that burdens the poor the most. Surely the government has to own part of the blame, and rationing or price controls will be something of a cop out. Arguably, it is not supply-demand disequilibrium either and has more to do with cost-push factors. Does the opposition have any ideas on how to slay this hydra-headed monster?
In times of low growth and employment opportunities few and far between, privatisation is not the most wholesome of options. But if we don't do something about it fiscal deficit will soar, leading to more indirect taxes and an uptick in inflation. Where does the opposition stand in this trade-off between jobs and taxes?
These are the more obvious policy choice challenges. There are many more, including the larger 'macro stability - micro disruption' conundrum. One way to deal with them is to happily keep blaming the government for its ineptitude. The other is to table alternatives for sober discussion in the parliament and outside. What course does national interest dictate?
Foreign policy is another area with diverging roads. Do we take the one less travelled, or the one more fair but less just? Either way, national cohesion is mission-critical. It is too important a matter to play politics with. We have to send out an unambiguous signal - this is not one party's solo flight but a well thought out articulation of national interests.
Of course, both interests and friends can change, and developments in the region are throwing up a bevy of new challenges. Where do we position ourselves in what appears to be the beginning of the new Great Game?
We have to ask ourselves if in punching above our weight we risk being pushed against the ropes; we need to examine the extent to which a weak economy and poor human development provides space for a foreign policy that is not reactive. This requires a level-headed discussion in the parliament, perhaps first at committee level, in camera if necessary.
It is not enough to hold the government guilty of misgovernance. It is not an invention of this government; it has been festering for some time. A responsible opposition should not stop at repeating ad nauseam that good governance and weak institutions cannot co-exist. It ought to share with the parliament ways to revive the atrophied institutions.
The point is that our issues - economic, foreign policy, governance, political - have persisted through all governments. Is it because the governments change but not their minders? There are solutions but they conflict with the interests of the minders, those who bring you into office and manage you.
Why agricultural income is not taxed the way other incomes are? Why isn't irrigation water priced right? Why aren't subsidies that disincentivize productivity and competitiveness rolled back? Why can't state enterprises be run efficiently? Why don't we want to reform the civil service?
The opposition has a clear choice: tell us how things can be fixed, or keep playing the blame game - until it is your turn and it comes around.
Comments
Comments are closed.