30 December 2013, 12:38 PM IST
Arvind Kejriwal has made all the right noises after being sworn in as the Chief Minister of Delhi. His climb to the post of the CEO of Delhi has rattled (and shattered) many. Many still find it unbelievable that a party as old as mere six months could form the government in a symbolically important place as the national capital, that too just months before what promises to be the most keenly fought general elections in India in the first half of 2014.
But, for him to make a real mark and for people not to lose hope in his unconventional style of working, Arvind needs to get out of symbolism at the earliest even as he makes moves that generate confidence. Thanks to a vibrant social media who the main stream media can increasingly ill-afford to ignore, the honeymoon period in politics is fast reducing.
Among his first jobs after taking over as the CM was to effect a flurry of bureaucratic transfers. Among the nine IAS officers shuffled were the bosses of DTC and Delhi Jal Board, who swapped places. A new person was installed to look after power as well. Of course, power and water are key to his agenda and promises made to the public at large.
While any CEO has the right to effect changes to his team, one still wonders on what inputs these changes were effected on the day the new government took over. It is not possible that all this was based on some official briefing on performances of each of the officers. It was simply too early for that to happen. So, he must have relied on advise received from people around, which is fair. For, often the reality can vary from the official record.
But the doubts still linger, because it does seem some of the input was flawed. At least two of the important changes made are of people who have a dodgy reputation and keep extremely dodgy company too. Surely, that can't be the criteria for putting people in change of important departments. And I don't think Arvind would ever put a person with such a reputation in an important position anyway.
Why I am raising this is because some things must not be rushed into, for a wrong move would be counterproductive. Proper background check is a must for any officer, even more so of those who will be critical to implementing the new government's agenda.
Then there is this issue of symbolism. Of course, there is a place for symbolism in any field, more so in politics, but that certainly cannot be the cornerstone of someone's strategy. Arvind's decision to come by metro for your oath taking ceremony was wonderful. But it would have been a lot better if he had just come using the metro without announcing it to the world the day before. The result was that the common man was troubled and any number of regular commuters couldn't get into the trains overcrowded with those who were there to either receive or merely see him. See this story that details the hardships that the common man was put through at the time (http://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/delhi/politics/No-aam-aadmi-in-metro-with-arvind-kejriwal/articleshow/28042283.cms). Surely, that couldn't be his intention, but that can be one of the undesirable outcomes of symbolism.
Although I would love him to continue using public transport, I think that would be impractical, especially due to security issues. Whether one likes it or not, a person occupying that post, especially one who has the ability to ruffle important feathers, needs security. But Goa Chief Minister is already walking the talk in terms of austerity and use of minimum government facilities, including transportation. And one has also seen how petroleum minister Veerappa Moily uses the metro. After the initial tamasha, he has actually been using it like a common man with a minimum of fuss. (http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/randomaccess/entry/kudos-to-moily-but-don-t-make-it-a-tamasha) As a regular user of metro, I myself can vouch that there is no better way to keep your ears to the ground and in touch with real issues of the common man than traveling by public transport.
If Arvind really wants to set an example, what he needs to do is to at least make his officers walk the talk. The man who will mastermind his water issues, so critical to his overall agenda, was the chief of Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC). I can bet he never ever used the buses under his control except, perhaps for occasional photo-ops. Would be wonderful if Arvind were to make officers use what they run. Tell the DTC chief, for example, that the office car is only to be used in an emergency, else he must use the transport service he oversees, now that the buses are new and comfortable with AC. This would also encourage others and that would have a genuine multiplier effect, forcing cars off the road. Believe me, that would generate far more goodwill than any other photo-op.
The Jal board officer too needs to be told clearly that his job is to ensure quality water to residents of Delhi and not merely ensure water tankers are despatched to the powerfuls in Lutyens Delhi so that they can use up a thousand times more than an ordinary person, to water their lawns or have rain dance parties.
As for the buses, there is a precedent. When TN Seshan was the head of the bus service in Chennai at the start of the career, he would travel incognito and censure those doing wrong. Such was the impact that at one time, there was a talk that city buses were as punctual as the Swiss railways! So, where there is a will, there is a way.
As I said, symbolism has its place, but it needs to be quickly supported by a system that can let things happen. For example, this thing about a telephone number on which you can call and register your complaint is nothing new. Call centers have been doing this for years. But we also know the backlash that follows when things are not resolved. And here, there is not one, but thousands of issues that need to be tackled, for so messed up is the system.
And finally, as they get down to working towards it all, he must watch out for the arrogance that seeps into anyone having power. Already there are instances of high handedness of some cadre. Arvind has to show zero tolerance to such acts. We certainly don't want a repeat of what used to happen in West Bengal decades ago, when supporters of a particular party would be a law unto themselves with no police having the guts to take them on out of fear.
That would take us back, not ahead. As I said, all symbolism is good, but just as a start.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
Symbolism is good, but just as a start
Dengan url
http://osteoporosista.blogspot.com/2013/12/symbolism-is-good-but-just-as-start.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
Symbolism is good, but just as a start
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
Symbolism is good, but just as a start
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar