The defeat of the motion against FDI in multi- brand retail demonstrates the government’s capacity to influence the political agenda
The government had the executive authority to decide to allow foreign direct investment in multi-brand retail, but the Opposition tactics of once more not allowing Parliament to function unless this policy was endorsed by the legislature forced the government’s hands.
The Congress-led UPA coalition had to bow to the Opposition’s wish and debate (and vote on) the issue in both Houses. As it transpired, the Opposition parties have taken a beating with both Houses defeating the motion against FDI in multi-brand retail tabled by the BJP.
This does not just speak of the UPA’s first-rate floor management, particularly by parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath and his colleagues, but also demonstrates the government’s capacity to influence the political agenda even when it is generally thought the UPA-2 government has lost the plot. More, it speaks of the country’s political mind at this point in time.
The Bahujan Samaj Party, which dalits across India see as embodying their aspirations though this party’s strong suit is Uttar Pradesh, abstained in the Lok Sabha but voted on the government side in the Rajya Sabha, signalling that the poorest constituency in the country did not take as dim a view of the government policy on FDI in multi-brand retail as many others did, notably the BJP and the Left. The Opposition calculation was that a combination of the Left and the Right Opposition, aided by West Bengal’s Trinamul Congress, which deserted UPA-2 only recently, would be able to generate enough ruckus across the country against FDI in the broad retail sector and embarrass the government at least in the Rajya Sabha, where UPA-2 is well short of a majority. But the gambit failed.
After being licked in the ring, the Opposition parties are speaking of their “moral victory”. This is extraordinary as the government’s triumph didn’t come on the back of a brute majority. It was not David versus Goliath. The official side had to go out and find backers on the strength of political logic (in addition to the merits of the FDI case). The charge against the BSP’s Mayawati that she supported the government out of fear that the CBI would be used to harass her in a disproportionate assets case is unbecoming. It also denigrates the judiciary, which will decide the case, not the CBI. It may also be recalled that in the confidence vote against the UPA-1 government in 2008, the BSP had supported the Opposition, unmindful of the so-called CBI factor.
On more market-oriented measures, the government will have to weigh the question of political support on each issue. Its focus should really be on bringing prices down, helping step up investments by lowering the interest rate and passing the next Budget.
Post new comment