The minimalistic Chanakyan state (the minimum government that allows for maximum governance) laid the foundations for a strong governance model based on dharmic principles. The ‘State’ was reflective of a ‘welfare state’ and seen as an organization whose administration ran with meritocracy built on public accountability, unity of command, business rules and coordination.
One of the things Chanakya laid emphasis on was that ‘corruption’ erodes the legitimacy of the ‘state’. Corruption directly impacts economic and general governance, which leads to inequality, exclusion and perpetuates all sorts of ‘poverty’. To reap Bharat’s demographic dividend, corruption must be institutionally dealt with, and not approached just as a crime. It must be removed through leadership ethos and process efficiencies.
Minimum government connotes minimal bureaucratic cholesterol and red tape, which means a focused and efficient system where the ability to respond is limitless. There ought to be required decentralization and facilitation: central government devolving, collaborating, and facilitating the states, and the States devolving and facilitating the Municipal bodies and so forth. Governance sits with a government naturally that is lean, works with evidence-based data, works for and with citizens, and works in partnerships. It is not easy for a government to be a financier, policy maker, service provider, regulator, and purchaser, and remaining effective too.
Federalism is more likely to prosper when perception and reality get complete alignment where the whole is made greater than the sum of its parts – the states in the context of a federal nation. One of the institutional answers for making federal structure work better is forming smaller states. A small state is likely less resistant to seamless cooperation with other states. Smaller states also compete by offering superior investment climate, law and order, accountable bureaucracy and reliable utility services. Albeit, the Centre remains a lead player in a few areas, and a facilitator and nudge player in the rest, allowing the North and South, and the East and West twain to meet through institutional, and administrative means – both formal and non-formal.
The Bhartiya State must do less to do more. Bharat has around 60 central ministries (Japan has 9, the US has 14, and the UK has 21), which begets siloed tendencies. A generic classification around core functionalities (Home, Homeland Security, External Affairs, Defense, Economy, Education, Healthcare, Energy, Environment, Technology, Industry, Commerce, Food Security, Rural Development, Urban Development, Transport, Communications and so forth) would produce far greater synergies, and allow sub-classifications catered to by skilled specialists. States’ ministries should be similarly tweaked. The 21st-century economy requires all ministries to have the power of specialism.
The difference between poor and rich countries is institutions: Institutions, which balance the short term with the long term. Bharat’s resolve to be a Viksit (Developed) Bharat (For example: substantial increase in Per Capita GDP and Human Development Index) means that all its institutions must become fully developed first – resilient and wanting to serve our society – starting from now. To illustrate a few: Letting the Election Commission of India stop political parties from using taxpayer money for political benefits, and ensuring political parties’ manifestos stay relevant and illuminate the pathways to a Viksit Bharat; Enabling the Comptroller and Auditor General of India to change outcomes and behaviors; Allowing the Central Vigilance Commission to stop corruption; Allowing NITI (‘National Institution for Transforming India’) Aayog become a High Command of Development Strategy and so forth.
Apart from legislative leads, the regulatory institutions lie at the heart of good governance, and their autonomy and accountability (in that order) are key to determining the quality of our democratic processes. The regulatory authorities’ fuse powers of two or all three organs of the state, namely the legislative, executive and judiciary for a specific domain. The government’s Legislative agenda, therefore, needs to adhere to a) Principle-based primary legislations that align the objectives across related streams, and b) Sectoral Regulatory spaces through principle-based secondary regulations to develop and maintain fair, safe, and stable markets for the valid protection of end consumers. Bharat needs regulatory bodies, in all spheres of our economic activities.
Bureaucracies tend to become status quoist, especially with one-exam smugness and lack of specialization. Though the English-speaking engineering graduate is the face of the Indian Administrative Services today, a meritocratic civil service is a meta-reform that will raise Bharat’s productivity, it’s firms and citizens. Performance management must recognize the uncertain outcomes of risk-taking. Bharat’s steel frame needs heavy training reforms besides, Bharat needs technocrats with administrative acumen as each discipline needs inch-wide mile-deep human capital rather than a mile-wide inch-deep perspective. It is not a battle between generalists and specialists but between micro and macro-specialists. Meanwhile, adapting and honing military HR practices would improve civil services, including organizational structures mirroring flatter bodies, and thin tops.
The administrative laws that mediate relations amongst beings (catering especially to Nari Shakti) and entities (without weakening the environment) form an important bedrock for sound governance in society. These promote good conduct as well. For example, creating a common market for liquor with an opt-out clause for states that decide on prohibition would offer a more holistic approach to regulation than that imposed by the states themselves. Uniformly high tax rates nationwide can serve as deterrence, without allied policing complications of having states trying to micromanage every link in the chain. Another example would be involving formalization of the economy from deals to rules where Chartered Accountants’, Companies Secretaries’ organizations and Law Firms could be pressed into active service for evolving appropriate governance rules.
There are other caveats too. The Ease of Doing Business means having a collaborative mindset, with the innocent not required to prove innocence. Restoring policy balance would require targeting poor people along with transforming places. Accelerating farm-to-non-farm transition require addressing the imbalance, and incoherence of laws that regulate jobs. In a world driven by technology, countries focusing on innovation will prosper, and to encourage higher activity in research the government’s co-opting the private sector would take the realm of innovation beyond feasible. The government and its agencies are large buyers of a wide range of goods and services. A window for receiving unsolicited innovation-based offers, and taking purchase decisions on a negotiated price, in addition to the normal competitive procurement process would take governance to a new level. The Public-sector undertakings’ (PSUs) continuous improvements in productivity and quality, through genuine autonomy and accountability, would shift the debate around disinvestment to reforming and enhancing the PSU value. Governments don’t create jobs; they help businesses do. Bharat’s administrative governance must nurture inclusion through bottom-up, people-led processes; built around trust, solidarity, and partnerships. It must have high levels of appetite for confronting vested interests, essential for transformation. The focus on appropriate policies must have broader lenses – working with communities as well as working for communities. Those who have larger sense of life should only wield power as life cannot be handled little by little. It is important to take a direction and dedicate to the process. The all-enveloping ethos would be la Jose Manuel Barroso, the former President European Commission, who once said in his annual ‘State of the Union’ speech to the European Parliament, ‘We need to be bigger on big things and smaller on small things’. Bharat’s timeless disposition, its narratives, and its truth must be enabled back.
Arun Agarwal is an author, columnist, teacher and ex-CEO. He is currently a Professor of Practice at Rizvi Institute of Management Studies and Research, Mumbai.