That's because it's difficult to see the opposition as helping the government merely because it is convinced about the need for reform. The fact that this election has seen an unprecedented level of personal attacks is not likely to help matters. Nor is the party in government any better, in its desire to take exclusive credit for any positive fallout associated with reform. During the course of numerous debates during this election, former finance ministers have been keen to project themselves as the architects of reform, often pooh-poohing the efforts of the others. This is merely one upmanship. It may be good politics, from a very short-term point of view, but it is certainly not good for the country. And this problem assumes serious proportions when the opposition controls the upper house of Parliament. That is increasingly likely to be the scenario in a situation where shifting coalitions win small majorities in the Lok Sabha for short periods of time. When they have a majority in the upper house, theopposition, if it wants to, can easily stonewall and delay legislation on one pretext or the other. They can insist on referring bills to select committees, make minor amendments et al, the objective being to prevent the government from performing. That's exactly what has happened with the insurance bill, which has become a political football.

Politicians from all parties must realise that paralysing the government's working in this fashion is against the national interests. Nor is it likely to yield dividends for the opposition in the long run. Parties which have pledged to support economic reform in their manifestoes must continue to support it, regardless of whether they are in the government or in opposition.