An absence of judgement TICKER
This is a fraught moment. It is barely over six months since Narendra Modi announced the withdrawal of all high-value currency notes. And, in another few days, it will be the third anniversary of his sweeping victory in the general elections. This is a fraught moment — because we better cross our fingers and hope the Prime Minister doesn’t have another such idea. He doesn’t like too much time to pass in between them.
We are still feeling the after-effects of demonetisation — the latest casualty in the rolling waves of stress that decision set off is the microfinance and village lending sector — but it has largely vanished from the headlines, and even from policy discussion. After all, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) won Uttar Pradesh, and won it so very handsomely. How could anyone even suggest, after such an overwhelming democratic mandate, that demonetisation wasn’t the best idea in history?
Well, it bears repeating that — election verdict or no election verdict — it was not a great idea. In fact, it was a terrible idea to start off with. It was then poorly implemented. And it has achieved none of the goals it was supposed to serve. These three things are true whether or not Modi wins or loses elections.
It is Modi’s job to find policies that he can sell in order to win elections, and he seems to do it very well. But that should not really figure in anyone else’s evaluation of policy. The problem is that, as the Modi government has consolidated its power, bad or indifferent policymaking is becoming viewed as acceptable precisely because there is no electoral backlash for the Prime Minister.
This shift in narrative is subtle, but far-reaching. It causes legitimate criticism of bad policy to be muted, or replaced in some cases with fulsome praise. Consider, for example, the increasing misuse of Aadhaar. A scheme that was supposed to be a lightweight form of identification for those that had none is being transformed into something quite different: a requirement that any bureaucrat can impose on those he has power over, simply to appear like he is doing something. This is a bad idea whether or not the BJP appears unbeatable in state assemblies or wins the presidential election.
Consider also the new scheme for low-cost airline connectivity. It is well-designed in most ways, and I myself have praised it in this column. But it is still subject to one unfortunate handicap: the requirement, imposed from up above, that there be a cap on certain tickets of ~2,500. Such caps are always a bad idea, no matter whether or not they are politically popular or not.
Over the past six months, and particularly since demonetisation, the earlier tendency to look only for the “positives” in any decision that emerges from the inner corridors of power has morphed into a full-blown pathology. Carefully evaluating policy for its long-term effects on growth, inequality, sustainability or any other important economic parameter — or even saying that performance data is inconclusive or unavailable — is seen as unforgivable negativity, especially when the people have repeatedly demonstrated their confidence in the policymakers.
It should go without saying that this is a dangerous development. Neither mindless criticism nor unthinking praise helps the national conversation to properly evaluate or alter policy. We do not have to go back to previous governments to imagine a more reasoned and balanced examination of policies emerging from New Delhi; we can look just at the first year or so of the Modi government itself, where such subjects as the land acquisition law and its stand on trade were subject to much more solid examination from all quarters than they would be now, were they rolled out today.
This column is not meant to be a detailed examination of the Modi government’s three years. It is meant merely to mark the fact that, three years in, it is unlikely that any detailed report card on the Modi government will be produced with the care and focus on the essentials of policymaking, and the respect for data, that is vital for any sensible evaluation. Naturally, this suits the government very well. It is in their interest to confuse the public, to make leaks sound like plans, plans sound like announcements, and announcements sound like achievements.
But if we buy into this rhetorical slipperiness, then we have only ourselves to blame. Objectively it appears the Modi government has done about as well on the economy as did the Manmohan Singh government towards the end of its tenure; it has improved those numbers that are credible only marginally more than would be expected during any business cycle recovery. The only difference is that it has focused its formidable energy on managing the narrative. And those of us who are cowed by the extraordinary popularity of the Prime Minister have been complicit in this twisting of fact and this absence of judgement.