His Master's Voice

His Master's Voice

The most conspicuous part of the President's address to Parliament on the opening day of its Budget session is, of course, the one dealing with the proposed review of the Constitution. The contrast this provides with the observations of K.R. Narayanan on the same subject in his address at the same august forum on the occasion of the golden jubilee of the Republic of India has, in fact, drawn immediate notice. There is no need, however, to labour the point that the President has now spoken for the Union government, while he had aired his own reservations in this regard in January. What may indeed be more notable is the extent to which the official position of presidential presentation takes cognizance of Narayanan's earlier critique. Less than a month ago, he had loudly wondered about the need for a review of the Constitution that had served the nation and its people so well and asked rhetorically whether the statute "had failed us or we had failed it". On the government's behalf, it has now been pleaded that,while "keeping the basic structure and salient features of the Constitution inviolate", it has become necessary to review it after 50 years of its operation to "better achieve the ideals enshrined" in the document. It has also been assured that the recommendations of the commission entrusted with the review will be placed before Parliament, "the supreme decision-making body in Indian democracy". The President's address alone, however, may not suffice to allay all the apprehensions raised by the review exercise.

The government may, in fact, have to face and answer questions in this session of Parliament about the commission's composition, its inclusion of politicians strongly committed to a stand for certain controversial constitutional changes. The apprehensions will remain as long as sections inthe ruling camp -- not only from the wild frontier of the sangh parivar but even persons in responsible positions at the Centre and in states -- appear to be harbouring a "hidden agenda" or agitating issues repeatedly proclaimed to have been "put on the back burner". It is for the BJP-led Centre to bear the President out by adhering to its open agenda.

No less noteworthy is the extent to which the President would seem to be answering the President on another subject -- economic reforms. In January, Narayanan had some plain-speaking also on the dire need to save the reforms from the danger of coming to be seen as outrageously discriminatory and unjust, to "beware" of the wrath of the people. The President has now sought to dispel the notion that the reforms are only for the rich or the middle class and asserted that the poor are "at the centre" of the reforms. More than merely hinting at "harsh measures", particularly to reduce the fiscal deficit, he has sought to stress that the beneficiaries of such steps will include those at the bottom rungs of the economy. This, again, is a claim, to which the government can add credibility more by the manner of economic policy implementation than by the length of its list of planned initiatives. This is the first presidential address of its kind in the recent years not to allude to the coalitionary polity. This may bea welcome indication of a new sense of stability, raising hopes of confident political and economic management.