Last week, Indian Finance Minister Arun Jaitley presented his third budget since the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, came to power in May 2014. Modi campaigned on a platform of good governance, and many of his backers wagered that he would work to transform India’s economy while keeping his party’s social extremists in check. Nearly two years later, the record is mixed.
Jaitley’s presentation of the 2016 budget came after several weeks of political turmoil, during which the worst tendencies of Modi’s nationalist acolytes were on full display. The denouement featured BJP partisans gleefully cheering for sedition charges against students at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi who had allegedly made “anti-national” statements at a campus rally. Against this backdrop—not to mention this government’s serviceable, if unspectacular, budgets to date—investors were primed for some good news.
And this year’s budget offered some cause for good cheer. The BJP refused to budge from an ambitious road map for fiscal consolidation—adhering to a pledge to further slash the government’s deficit, a necessary and highly anticipated correction to its predecessor’s spending sprees. The news was particularly welcome given that last year’s budget had detoured somewhat from the plan with a pause in deficit cutting in favor of government stimulus.
The new budget, the government hopes, will set the stage for the central bank to slash interest rates, with the aim of rekindling the economy’s animal spirits and boosting growth. The budget also gives a fillip to roads, railways, and oil and gas—core infrastructure sectors in dire need of modernization. And it doubles down on India’s heroic biometric identification scheme (known as Aadhaar), designed to eventually channel leaky welfare benefits directly to citizens’ bank accounts, by promising to introduce legislation to place the program on a firm legal footing. Finally, the new budget reaffirms New Delhi’s commitment to reducing its micromanagement of the regions by devolving more funds to state governments.
Still, the BJP’s reform plans to date have failed to fundamentally transform the relationship between the state and capital, which has been historically skewed in favor of the former. Despite modest progress reducing the abundance of red tape that torments businesses and investors, outmoded state-owned enterprises and opaque and complex regulation remain deeply entrenched. Although Modi repeatedly pledged on the campaign trail to bring about “maximum governance, minimum government,” by now it is clear that the prime minister does not intend to drastically overhaul India’s economic model, preferring instead a piecemeal strategy, chipping slowly away at the myriad blocks that have frustrated private entrepreneurship and hampered development.
This year, talk of the aspirational “neo–middle class,” a hallmark of Modi’s campaign rhetoric, did not figure into the budget speech. Instead, in a move reminiscent of the Indian National Congress (INC) government that he triumphantly defeated, Modi delivered a budget aimed largely at India’s poor and rural citizens. This shift, while not entirely unexpected, was packed with political importance: the BJP was thrashed in last fall’s election in the critical state of Bihar, and it has been reeling from accusations from the INC’s peripatetic scion, Rahul Gandhi, that the BJP caters to the Indian corporate class at the expense of the common man. In a developing country such as India, especially one experiencing signs of rural distress, no government can afford to alienate the poor.
The challenge for Modi, therefore, is to use his considerable political capital to convince the electorate—not to mention skeptics within his own party—that pro-poor and pro-market are two sides of the same coin. For instance, the government’s most recent economic survey, released just prior to the budget, provided a devastating illustration of the extent to which costly subsidies for items such as fuel, food, and fertilizer have largely benefited groups other than the poor, in whose name they were established. Elsewhere, Modi has invested heavily in a glitzy “Make in India” campaign, designed to transform India into a global manufacturing powerhouse that would create jobs for the surfeit of low-skilled workers seeking formal employment, yet the government has yet to outline a progressive trade policy.
Despite winning the first single-party majority in parliament’s lower house in three decades, Modi has not effectively used the bully pulpit to champion such reformist policies. And that is part of an emerging pattern in which the prime minister’s silence has tended to speak louder than his words. Although Hindu nationalism is central to the BJP’s ethos, Modi largely stifled its most extreme manifestations in favor of a message of material and social uplift on his road to victory in 2014. Yes, the touchstones of Hindu nationalism are still littered throughout the party’s platform, but in a sharp departure from the days when they constituted the majority of the platform. Since coming to power, the BJP and its allies have casually deployed anti-minority rhetoric while falling over one another to prove their commitment to cow and nation. There is a lot of noise, but the prime minister himself is eerily quiet.
Modi appears unable to rein in elements of his party that perpetuate the worst of its hard-line traditions, and the fact that members of his cabinet have often vocally backed fringe positions suggests that he is also unwilling to do so. Either way, voters, investors, and commentators alike are recalibrating their expectations for what this government can achieve. The hope is that its efforts to modernize, if not necessarily liberalize, India’s economy will not be sideswiped by roiling social controversies. While Modi may no longer be hailed as the transformational leader whom so many Indians feverishly backed two years ago, he is still well positioned to steer a more favorable economic course for the world’s largest democracy. This week’s budget inches along in the right direction, but Modi must rediscover his voice if he is to preempt nationalist distractions and realize even its more modest economic vision.
Comments(5)
A comparison between NDA 1 and NDA 2 reveals interesting insights.. Atal govt too faced Hindutva hardliners problems.. Worse, there was systematic swadeshi campaign to prevent greater globalization.. However, economic liberalization was kept at a decent pace.. Modi has no such swadeshi pressure.. Yet, economic reforms are at snail pace.. What explains difference between Atal and Modi stykr of governance??
While one analyzes the two years of BJP rule eloquently, they forget a couple of things that would have helped them to see the picture of things to come way before today. 1. Amit Shah over Prashant Kishor: When BJP won the 2014 election, all the newspapers portrayed Amit Shah as the architect of the landslide victory. As it turns out, not only was it untrue but also a blunder that drove away the real person behind the miracle, Prashant Kishor. He created the so called Modi wave - a much discussed buzz word in the mainstream media. That was the first sign of trouble. By celebrating Amit Shah over Prashant Kishor, BJP chose Hindutva over the development. This must be the first time in this history of independent India that the elected government switched it agenda in a record time. Nobody noticed. I did. But then again I don't own a newspaper (or a TV channel for that matter.) 2. Gujarat in not India: Modi's promise of Gujarat model was hailed as a game changer. Most of it was publicity. But as business people we didn't do our due diligence. We took Gujarat model on the face value. Not only was Gujarat model flawed but also practically non-scalable. We heard the fairy tales of prosperity - well-strewned with words like governance and development - which echoed from ear to ear on every media outlet. However, we very conveniently ignored that Modi watched hundred of people getting murdered on the streets and did little to control the outburst ( again assuming that he was innocent) called Godra. We deliberately chose to see what we wanted to see - and ignored what we hate most. Now two years down the line, we see Narendra Modi for what he is - a hardcore Hindutva poster boy who lives uncomfortably with truth. Thanks for reading.
Drivel. Cherry pick random conclusions based on prejudiced narratives or colored ones of rather inconsequential events & try to peddle is as something deep. Typical Modi hating Soniaphile.
It is unfaire to call the budget in spectacular !where as most neutrals have praised , remember ,making pro capitalists budgets ,Modi neglected farmers ,and lost support of poor ,hope this budget repairs some of it still he has not gone anti big business , please remember all others have ganged up against him ,in an effort to survive ,surprisingly ,due to some family connection and loss of personal gains , some Media have also gone totally against him .
Author missed Opposition fillibustdring in lower house as Modi government is still in minority in lower house.
Comment Policy
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.