Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 150
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 151
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Interviews | Palaniappan Chidambaram, Indian Home Minister interviewed by Amol Sharma and Paul Beckett

Palaniappan Chidambaram, Indian Home Minister interviewed by Amol Sharma and Paul Beckett

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Feb 10, 2011   modified Modified on Feb 10, 2011

Indian Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram is the nation's domestic security chief, overseeing a broad portfolio that includes battling a homegrown Maoist insurgency and routing out terrorists. The 65-year-old, a veteran of the ruling Congress Party who previously held senior economic posts and played a key role in the country's post-1991 liberalization, is considered a future contender for the post of prime minister.

Recently, he spoke to The Wall Street Journal. Here are some excerpts:

WSJ: In light of the recent wave of corruption scandals in India, leading businesspeople have been complaining about what they call a "governance deficit," which they say could undermine India's impressive growth and progress up to this point. Do you agree with that sentiment?

P. Chidambaram: I think we should take serious note of the concerns expressed by the captains of industry and business. There is indeed a governance deficit in some areas and perhaps there is also an ethical deficit. But to conclude that these deficits have surfaced only now, in my view, would be totally wrong. These deficits have been there and we have from time to time tried to put in systems in order to meet the challenges of these deficits. But it is obvious that the systems that have been put in place are not entirely adequate and therefore any suggestion to improve the systems should be taken into account seriously.

WSJ: You played a big part in the 1991 reforms that set India on the path of economic liberalization. There are some people who say the reforms have stalled in the last few years. There has been a phenomenal growth rate but in areas where people have been expecting further liberalization, like foreign investment and large-scale privatization, things appear to have stopped. Is that fair?

P. Chidambaram: India's reforms cannot be seen only from the point of view of the captains of industry. What about the millions who have not gained from India's liberalization? I think we need to look at reforms from the point of view of those many millions of people also. And if you view it from the point of view of those millions, clearly, right to information, right to education, rural job guarantee program, the universalization of the mid-day meal scheme, the extension of the old age pension scheme and now the right to food, in whatever manner the bill will be, are clearly attempts to share the benefits of growth with the millions. That doesn't mean I scoff at the criticism which says you should move forward more quickly on financial-sector reforms or that you should address issues of fiscal deficit. They are equally important and they must be addressed. But to say that nothing else has happened and everything has stalled over the last two years, I feel, ignores all the changes that have been brought about in the last few years which benefit many more millions.

WSJ: Do you feel NREGA, the rural job-guarantee program, has been effective?

P. Chidambaram: Wherever it has been implemented faithfully, it has been very effective. Yes, there are complaints about leakages, complaints about nonpayment of wages. Let's keep them aside for a moment. Let's look at the immediate benefits. Firstly, it has raised the level of minimum wages all round, which is good. Secondly, it has reached areas where no other program has reached. Thirdly, it has, maybe an unintended consequence: It has, in effect, given an old age pension to a large number of old people who otherwise got nothing from society. Fourthly, at least taking the concrete example of my state, it was never very bad but now it is absolutely clear—nobody starves; there is no starvation as such. And there are many parts of India where one can now say with confidence that no family starves, no child goes to bed without having had at least two meals a day. So, I think there are incalculable benefits and spinoffs from the NREGA program. Yes, it has its faults and downsides that need to be addressed.

WSJ: Combating the Maoist insurgency in various parts of India obviously must be very high on your list of priorities. What are do you doing differently or expect to do differently in 2011 compared to what has been done before to address this issue?

P. Chidambaram: While it would be too early to make any claims, my assessment is that in Orissa, Jharkhand and, surprisingly, even West Bengal, the civil government has been able to gain an upper hand in many areas where they were nowhere in the picture. In Chhattisgarh, it has been a bit of a stalemate, a draw at the moment. In Andhra Pradesh, we always had an upper hand, although in one district there have been some setbacks- Vishakhapatnam rural district. In Gadchiroli, Maharashtra, there have been some setbacks. So, overall, some gains, some setbacks but we are still there engaging the Naxals.

Side by side, we have cut through all the very refined economic gobbledygook and simply put money in the hands of the three senior most district-level officers, and said "Go ahead and do whatever you think is doable in a matter of three months, depending upon what the villages need." So in 60 districts today, we have put 250 million rupees in each district and next year we will give them 300 million rupees and maybe a little more. These three officers have been given full freedom to do what needs to be done after consulting the village.

WSJ: So distributing money directly to districts like that—instead of as part of a formal government welfare scheme—is a new approach to this?

P. Chidambaram: I mean because all these fancy schemes are drawn up by these monitoring committees, I think half the time nothing gets done. So, we have just put 250 million rupees in the hands of these officers—the senior-most IAS officer who is district collector, the senior-most police officer who is district police superintendent and the senior-most forest officer who is district forest officer. We have said, "Three of you will decide on what has to be done."

WSJ: What about addressing concerns that industries are usurping the land of natives and tribal populations?

P. Chidambaram: These are difficult issues. The land in many places is owned by the community; in many places it is owned by the government, but it is occupied by the tribals. The minerals are in that land; the forests are in that land. If you want to mine the minerals, you have to cut the forests, you'll have to displace the tribals and give them alternative means of livelihood. We'll have to regenerate new forests. It is a very complex set of issues. But in my view, we have to find solutions to these issues which are practical. Ultimately, the minerals are only of value if you mine them. If they continue to remain in Mother Earth for another million years, it benefits nobody.

WSJ: When you took over as the home minister after the November 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks, you put a lot of emphasis on homeland security. Do you now feel you have the resources you need to deal with this?

P. Chidambaram: I think our capacity to deal with terror is better today than what it was two years ago. And if you ask me this question next year, I can say with confidence our capacity to deal with terror next year would be even better from what it is today. We have recruited more policemen, we have substantially augmented our capacity to train them, we have equipped them better —better clothing, better footwear, better weapons. We have trained them better and our intelligence gathering has improved considerably in order to be able to deal with challenges of terror.

WSJ: On the economic front, inflation is becoming a huge challenge, just as it was in 2008, when growth was picking up momentum. What's the best way to deal with it?

P. Chidambaram There is a trade-off between growth and inflation. The question is: What is the point at which people will tolerate a certain level of inflation given a certain level of growth? If anybody has an answer to that question, I will be very happy to know. But I think it is generally recognized that in India today, inflation is high and, particularly, food inflation is hurting the people. That is why government is concerned and has expressed its concerns. And the concerned ministries have got together and are putting in place a number of measures that will moderate both food inflation as well as the general inflation. I think government is as concerned as anyone else about inflation and we are trying to do our best.

WSJ: How much of the inflation we're seeing is demand-driven, especially in food, rather than supply-driven, as is ordinarily thought?

P. Chidambaram A large part is demand-driven. The higher minimum support prices that we give for [government procurement of agricultural commodities] has put more money in the hands of farmer producers. NREGA has put more money in the hands of the poor. The growth itself is creating more job and income opportunities. Therefore, any serious student of economics would say that, for the most part, this is demand-driven. Unfortunately, when demand is high, we have also had some supply shocks. I think we have had a bit of bad luck too—unseasonal rains.

WSJ: What is the way forward on inflation? How do you explain to the country that it is demand-driven?

P. Chidambaram Politically it is very difficult to explain these theories to the people. What the people want to know is when will prices moderate. The prices will moderate only when supply improves which is why the government is taking a number of measures to improve the supply side and one of the things is to ensure there is no hoarding, no cartelization, and there is free movement of these goods to the markets.

WSJ: Is the 8% or 9% growth that India has grown accustomed to sustainable?

P. Chidambaram: It is sustainable if we do the right things at the right time. The biggest risk is if we don't address structural issues in sectors that cry out for reforms.

WSJ: Do you feel India is being too cautious at the moment?

P. Chidambaram: There was a legitimate caution after what we saw in 2008. The global financial crisis has induced a legitimate caution. But we have weathered the crisis better than most other countries. In fact, India is one of the handful of countries which weathered the crisis well.

WSJ: Is it difficult to bring about dramatic reforms within a coalition government like the current one?

P. Chidambaram: No. Coalition politics doesn't interfere with policy-making or policy implementation. Coalition politics has its own problems; managing parliament, managing expectations, giving a sense of cohesion, communicating to the people. These are the problems that coalition politics brings. I don't think coalition politics itself inhibits taking the right decisions or implementing them.

WSJ: You're an avid cricket fan. Are you a big fan of the Chennai Super Kings in the IPL league?

P. Chidambaram You can be passionate about a national, even about a state, team. But when nationalities and countries are all mixed together, it's very difficult to develop a loyalty merely based on the headquarters of the team. This is headquarters loyalty, not loyalty to the team.

The Wall Street Journal, 18 January, 2011, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704132204576136392689766896.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Tagged with: NREGS



Related Articles

 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...

Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...

"Session 1: Scope of IDEA and AgriStack" in Exploring...

"Session 2: Farmer Centric Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...

"Session 3: Future of Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...

Objectives | About Us | Workshops | Disclaimer
share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close