For the BJP, the warning is less about an immediate loss of political support and more about ensuring that accumulated local grievances do not eventually become a broader electoral narrative.
The Narendra Modi government continues to enjoy a significant degree of personal goodwill for the Prime Minister, but sections of officials who remain broadly supportive of the government have flagged concerns over governance, ground-level corruption and a weakening feedback mechanism, saying these issues need to be addressed in mission mode. The assessment, emerging from interactions by a group of senior officials with people across different sections of society, is that two of the principal planks that helped establish the BJP’s political credibility in 2014, governance and the promise of fighting corruption, are facing increasing questions at the ground level. However, the officials say that there remains considerable political space for corrective action because PM Modi’s personal connect with voters remains “incredibly strong.” According to officials, the principal concern relates to the difference between the experience of government at the ground level and the way its performance is perceived or communicated at higher levels. The problem was particularly visible among ordinary citizens who do not have access to frustration. political, administrative or personal networks to get routine government work completed. “People who have access to the system can make a call and get their work done. The problem is with the ordinary citizen. At the ground level, people are finding it increasingly difficult to get even their mundane work completed by officials,” one official familiar with the assessment said. The official said that at the state and local levels, citizens were increasingly encountering unresponsive officials and delays in routine administrative work. “There is a difference between the perception of governance from the top and the experience of governance at the bottom. For the ordinary person, the government is often the official sitting in front of them. If that person is unresponsive, the citizen does not experience governance as being effective,” the official said. The condition of public infrastructure was cited as another source of concern. Officials pointed to cracks and deterioration in roads and highways and to continuing difficulties faced by commuters in DelhiNCR, particularly during the monsoon. Traffic congestion and waterlogging, they said, have become recurring sources of public A similar concern was cited in other BJP-ruled states including Madhya Pradesh, including the condition of roads. According to the officials, such issues acquire political significance because they are experienced directly by citizens and are not dependent on how government achievements are communicated. The Delhi-NCR situation was also cited as particularly significant because the BJP is in power at the Centre and in all the states surrounding the national capital. Officials said people were asking why problems that have persisted for years have not been resolved despite political control across the governments concerned. The second and potentially more politically consequential concern raised by the officials relates to ground level corruption. “At the lower levels, people are experiencing it directly. It is affecting them while they are trying to get routine work done,” an official said. The officials said this was particularly significant because the people directly affected belonged substantially to lower-middle and middle-income sections, which have been an important component of BJP’s support base. This section of voters is less likely to express its dissatisfaction through public protests, and subsequently had to be reconsidered. social media campaigns or highly visible political activity. “They do not necessarily vent their anger publicly. They may not write about it on social media or come out and speak against the government. But they experience these problems in their daily lives. The expression of that anger may come when they vote,” the official said. Officials believe that this makes such dissatisfaction particularly difficult to detect through conventional political feedback mechanisms. They said the BJP’s feedback system during the initial years after 2014 was considerably stronger and more responsive to public sentiment. “After 2014, the feedback system was very strong. They knew what the issues were and what impact a particular policy could have. Over time, that feedback system has weakened,” an official familiar with the assessment said. The officials believe that the weakening of this feedback loop has contributed to policy decisions or implementation choices that could potentially have been better calibrated to public concerns. The changes involving the UGC were cited by one official as an example. According to the official, the changes generated opposition among sections of students and their families The implementation of E20, or 20% ethanolblended petrol, was cited as another example where the official felt that a more gradual approach could have reduced public concerns. The argument being made by the officials is not that every such policy decision was necessarily wrong, but that the government needs a stronger mechanism for anticipating the impact of policies and responding to concerns before they become politically significant. The officials also raised concerns over what they described as an increasing focus among some ministers on communicating achievements rather than addressing problems at the ground level. “There is a greater focus on putting out claims on social media, in newspapers and on television about the work being done. But there is a considerable difference between what is being claimed and what is actually happening on the ground,” another official said. According to the official, this communication-first approach was also being replicated within the administrative machinery, with officials at lower levels increasingly documenting and publicising initiatives rather than ensuring that their impact was visible on the ground. “They are expanding the work that they do on paper and in communication, but the actual work on the ground is much less,” the official said. The officials cited the recent CJP-led protest as another example of what they described as the weakening of the government’s internal feedback mechanism. “This issue should not have become so big. If the feedback system was robust enough, it would not have been allowed to assume such proportions. The Prime Minister eventually had to intervene and the Education Minister had to resign,” the official said. The official said the episode illustrated what he described as a larger problem within the system: issues that should ordinarily be identified and resolved at the ministerial or administrative level were increasingly reaching the Prime Minister for intervention. “The Prime Minister is being forced to handle everything. That is not his job. The ministers have to ensure that an issue does not become so big that the Prime Minister has to intervene personally,” the official said. According to the official, the concern was not about the Prime Minister’s willingness or ability to intervene, but about the opportunity cost of having to do so repeatedly. The broader concern among the officials is that the Prime Minister’s continuing political credibility could itself create an expectation that he will eventually step in and resolve problems. While that gives the government considerable political resilience, they believe the layers of administration and political management below the Prime Minister need to better their act. The officials, however, made a distinction between the functioning of the government and the standing of the Prime Minister himself. According to their assessment, Modi’s personal affection and credibility among voters remain intact. “The personal affection and trust for the Prime Minister is still there. That is also why the dissatisfaction has not translated into complete anger against the government or the organisation. There is still a belief that the Prime Minister will identify the problems and make the necessary changes,” an official said. The officials see this as an important window for corrective action. In their assessment, voters who remain dissatisfied with aspects of governance are not necessarily looking to reject the BJP immediately. Rather, they are looking for an effective alternative, should one emerge. “There is no indication that everyone has turned against the BJP. But there is a search for a good option, a strong option. If such an option becomes available, people will not necessarily hesitate to vote for it,” an official familiar with the assessment said. At the same time, there appears to be a divergence between the feedback received by these officials and the BJP’s own assessment of its electoral position. When asked about the party’s assessment, one official said that the BJP’s survey-based internal feedback continues to indicate that the party is likely to return to power. The official, however, suggested that this assessment may not fully capture the concerns emerging from interactions with people outside the party’s formal feedback mechanisms. The officials assess that the BJP retains significant political advantages, particularly because of PM Modi’s personal credibility. But they believe those advantages need to be supplemented by the people in the system for stronger governance and a more responsive political and administrative machinery. For the BJP, the warning is less about an immediate loss of political support and more about ensuring that accumulated local grievances do not eventually become a broader electoral narrative.
