By Invitation: Adrift for 3 years, can Sid wake up in time for 2018?
The Siddaramaiah government in Karnataka completes three years in exceptional political circumstances, both within the state and across the country.
Exceptional for multiple reasons: three years of Congress as a ruling party in a state which has sent the incumbent party packing in every election in the last quarter century places a high premium on performance for any government; at the national level, a good showing in Karnataka is critical for the overall revival plans of the party, even as one keenly awaits the electoral verdict in Assam and Kerala to see if the Congress can hold on to power in the two states. The spotlight, therefore, will be on performance in the remaining two years as Siddaramaiah and the Congress gear up for the next Assembly election.
In auditing a government's performance, the prism one uses is the link between promise and performance, expectation and experience, rhetoric and reality, and possibly the intensity of the feel good factor, or otherwise, amongst the people, ruling party cadres and those entrusted with the responsibility of managing the government. Does one have a sense of cautious optimism about the journey thus far or overtaken by a series missed opportunities over the last three years?
When Siddaramaiah assumed office as the CM heading a Congress government, he brought to the office his rich experience in politics, deft handling of important portfolios in previous Cabinets and two stints as deputy chief minister under two different chief ministers. It was clear when he moved from the Janata Dal to the Congress in 2006 that his natural progression in state politics would be to the position of chief minister. It became a reality seven years later, when he won the support of both the Congress’ legislature party and its high command.
The political signals were always clear — a promise of a corruption-free government that focused on economic development, social justice and political stability. The early months of the first year in office — the honeymoon period — were full of expectation and goodwill. It ended abruptly with the BJP winning a majority of seats from the state in the Lok Sabha elections held within a year of Siddaramaiah taking office. It must be stressed that the CSDS-Lokniti Post Poll Survey 2014 showed that the Congress government in Karnataka did enjoy popular support, but the verdict of the voter was clearly against the ten years of the UPA. The state government did not capitalize on this sufficiently, and chinks in the state’s ruling party armour were soon visible.
The blame game for the Lok Sabha poll defeat in the state brought the factionalism in the Congress party out in the open. Given the fact that Siddaramaiah had always to contend with the newcomer tag, the defeat in the Lok Sabha polls only served to widen the gulf between the old Congressmen and the new recruits. It could also be argued that little effort was made by the leadership to demonstrate an inclusive approach and the rift between the government and the ruling party widened with time.
Factional rivalry has been a bane of the Congress party and its governments in the past, too, and so a major challenge for any CM is to be able to carry all segments of the party along. The experience of the Siddaramaiah government has led to a perception that decision-making is controlled by a small coterie of his loyalists. In times of crisis, the CM was left to defend the government, with few amongst his cabinet colleagues taking responsibility unless it specifically related to their departments.
Another dimension to the inclusiveness debate has been the limited efforts of the leadership to build a wider social coalition. Siddaramaiah had created a specific identity by leading the AHINDA movement of non-dominant backward castes, dalits and minorities, in the years before he assumed office. One hoped he would continue to make a conscious effort to widen his social base. Many would argue that little effort has been made, however. Even many groups within the AHINDA movement have felt that they did not get their due. This is a critical challenge the CM continues to face.
Decision-making on critical matters has been slow, dictated more by the series of political setbacks that the party and the leadership have had to face in the three years in power. Actions taken in the first year in office often see a trickle-down effect towards the end of the term. While many bold initiatives were seen in 2013, the pace of their implementation has left much to be desired. Initiatives like creating a Vision Group for Bengaluru would have been more appropriate in the first year in office rather than now, two years away from the next election. The disgruntlement among the rank and file in the party on excruciatingly long delays in filling posts of chairpersons of boards and corporations, the dilly-dallying on cabinet reshuffle, and the use of the slightest political excuse to delay taking critical decisions has dampened enthusiasm of the party cadres. Above all, the success of a government often depends on the sync between the ruling party machinery and the leaders in important positions in government. This link could have been stronger, more visible and leveraged positively.
Three years into their tenure, there are many missed opportunities. This has created an image of a government merely drifting along mechanically towards completing its term. A searching second look at the political strategy to bring together and energise all factions within the party and govern over the next two years would help move towards a mood of 'cautious optimism'. A review of the record of past Congress administrations (1989-1994 and 1999-2004) would indicate that the drift halfway through the term led to the party losing at the next political hustings.
