Now, let political parties define their ideological options for maximising the nation's wealth.
Taaj-poshi (crowning) in BJP, says Nitish. Is it such an important event in politics that someone gets nominated as a campaign chief of BJP for the next Lok Sabha polls? Let the focus shift to a debate on policies for the nation.
Shouldn't the agenda of political discourse be on what is national interest and what policies alternative the political parties offer?
Yechury talks of an issue of national assets handed over to private control. This and other ideological issues should be debated and all political parties should clearly define their stand on policy prescriptions for maximising the nation's wealth.
For example, does BJP offer a clear alternative nationalist policy to SoniaG UPA's policy of selective loot of nation's wealth and stashing black money away in tax havens? Parties should spell out national agenda and offer alternatives to SoniaG UPA's policy of selective black money.
Kalyanaraman
http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2013/06/minimum-government-maximum-governance.htmlMinimum government, maximum governance: Take the message, let a non-Modi implement it -- William PesekN out of NDA | |
| SANKARSHAN THAKUR | |
Patna, June 16: The Ides of June have long haunted the JD(U)-BJP coalition in Bihar. Three years ago, the partners came to the verge of parting mid-June when a Narendra Modi-inspired advertisement in Patna newspapers so enraged Nitish Kumar that he withdrew a dinner invitation to the gathered BJP brass and all but broke the deal. Today, inspired by the shadow of a more insistent and unrelenting Narendra Modi, the Ides served to sunder. The Bihar chief minister stoked the simmer with his Gujarat counterpart to a fast-tracked flashpoint, robbing the NDA of its biggest ally, dismissing all 11 BJP ministers in government and seeking a fresh trust vote on June 19. In the bargain, he earned kudos from the UPA and a minority government that will need fresh cobbling of numbers to remain afloat. But Nitish, composed and smiling, betrayed no hint he had erred in course or judgement. He presented the break as an inevitable and unavoidable consequence of the run of play in the BJP. “A taaj-poshi (crowning) has happened in the BJP for everyone to see, and it is not acceptable to us,” Nitish announced upon a short meeting with governor D.Y. Patil this afternoon. “That crowning is a matter of political perception, not of technical nit-picking. It is not possible for me to avert my gaze from the writing on the wall any more, it is not possible to compromise on basic principles either. Therefore, we have decided to call this alliance off.” The BJP was swift and seething to react. Sushil Modi, ousted deputy chief minister and long labelled a Nitish acolyte, cried betrayal and called this a “Black Day” for Bihar. “This is treachery of the worst kind,” he said within minutes of Nitish pulling the plug. “I am certain the people of Bihar will teach him a lesson and avenge this insult to the mandate they had given us.” Aware a bitter parting was imminent, BJP ministers had refused to attend a hurriedly called cabinet meeting this morning, calling the move “futile trickery”. Nitish, on his part, blamed the BJP for creating an “untenable” constitutional situation. “I can understand ministers not working after they have resigned, but it is constitutional impropriety to refuse to do work or attend office without resigning. They were bent on paralysing the government, which is why I had to recommend their sacking.” An acrimonious battle now stares Bihar in the face, with the BJP livid not merely with the manner of the break but also with the JD(U)’s renouncement of Narendra Modi. “He is a leader we hold in the highest esteem,” said a top BJP functionary. “And the manner in which Nitish and his entire party have been insulting him is not acceptable, in fact it is reprehensible. The people of Bihar will give the final verdict on who they want; the battle has just begun.” The first battle-front will in all likelihood be the June 18 “Bihar bandh” called by the BJP. But party ranks are promising the tussle will only intensify thereafter. “Let Narendra Modi set foot in Bihar and we shall see which way the drift is headed,” a newly dismissed minister challenged. The JD(U) is mounting its own embattlements, some even suggesting that there may be a question on whether Narendra Modi will at all be allowed in the state. “We are committed to maintaining social harmony in Bihar and the politics and style of Narendra Modi is inimical to that. We shall have to take a considered call,” a senior JD(U) leader said. “We are prepared to meet the oncoming challenge.” A statement released by the JD(U) said the party had been “dismayed and gravely disappointed” by the events of recent days in the BJP. “There has been a rapid rise in the growing hegemonic control of a leadership that does not represent the characteristics which we had emphasised for the continuance of our alliance,” the statement said. “The increased dominance of this leadership in the party with the intention of thrusting its decisions on alliance partners has become evident. There is growing intolerance towards any voice of dissent or moderation in the decision-making process…. The Goa announcement of the chairmanship of the electoral campaign committee of the BJP has filled all of us with deep apprehensions about the future. It has left not a shadow of doubt that this is a mere ceremonial prelude to his (Narendra Modi’s — name not taken) nomination as the prime ministerial candidate.” Senior JD(U) parliamentarian N.K. Singh, who helped draft the divorce document, said that Modi’s anointment and subsequent march to the BJP’s centre stage had been “rather unabashed”. But to his mind, that has made the challenge greater for the BJP. “The implications of this decision are going to ripple much beyond Bihar,” he told The Telegraph. “After all, for the BJP it is not merely a matter now of retaining allies, their problem is going to be finding new allies. Many big parties and leaders were part of the NDA during Atalji’s and Advaniji’s time, where are they now? And how will the party attract them with Narendra Modi on top?” Nitish himself pooh-poohed speculation of a “wave” around Narendra Modi. “A majority is required to form governments. Where are the numbers with the BJP? They are deluding themselves imagining waves and storms, they are welcome to delude themselves. I am not willing to be part of it.” Although he never named Narendra Modi, Nitish was pointed in his references to the Gujarat chief minister and his part in the break-up. “We were running a smooth alliance; it is only when external interference started in the Bihar BJP and the running of the government that these problems began to arise and finally brought us to this pass. They are responsible for this break-up, not us.” Or perhaps it was the Ides of June. Published: June 17, 2013 02:13 IST | Updated: June 17, 2013 02:36 IST Yechury sees a political churningA new process of political churning, alignments and realignment of political forces in the country has begun, said Sitaram Yechury, Polit Bureau member of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), here on Sunday. A non-Congress and non-BJP front cannot be formed only for capturing political power. It should be for implementing alternative policies, he noted. On Trinamool Congress chairperson Mamata Banerjee’s call for a federal front, he said “fronts do not emerge merely on announcements.” “People’s confidence can be gained only on the basis of an alternative policy that provides relief to people from the policies of the UPA government,” Mr. Yechury told journalists. The Left, particularly the CPI(M), had to play a key role whenever such a non-Congress, non-BJP alternative emerged, he said referring to the V.P. Singh-led government in 1989 and the United Front government in 1996 at the Centre. “That is the role which others are expecting from us,” Mr. Yechury said. Asked whether at his recent meeting with senior Janata Dal (United) leader Sharad Yadav he told Mr. Yadav not to go with Mamata Banerjee and instead align with Left, Mr. Yechury said, “I did not have to tell him; he said it himself.” “His [Mr Yadav’s] understanding is very clear that the moral conscience of the country is Left and no alternative without it is possible.” The Trinamool Congress had shown “no consistency” and joined both the Congress and BJP-led governments at the Centre, he said. Considering Ms. Banerjee’s track record “there will be no place for her in the alternative front.” Calling for “socialist left” forces to unite, Mr. Yechury asserted that “the socialist Left and the communist Left together will be a powerful force to bring a radical change.” “The Left parties are meeting in Delhi on July 1. We are going to declare the alternative policy, which we think is required for the country and people,” he said adding that the main objective was to bring non-Congress, non-BJP parties onto a common platform — those willing to implement an alternative policy for the country. Published: June 17, 2013 01:45 IST | Updated: June 17, 2013 02:37 IST ‘National assets destroyed to promote private capital’National assets are being destroyed only to promote private capital and this makes no economic sense, said Sitaram Yechury, Polit Bureau member of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), here on Sunday. Speaking at a convention to “Save Kolkata Port Complex,” Mr. Yechury said there was an urgent need to save the maritime industry in the country “that is on the verge of collapse and will soon be taken over by private ports.” The CPI(M) MP, who is the Chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture, said that when a majority share of the budgetary allocation for developing infrastructure of ports “is not being utilised, the government is suffering from a pathological compulsion of public-private partnership.” “Instead of using private wealth for public good, the government is utilising public resources for creating private wealth,” Mr. Yechury added. “In the name of public-private partnerships, private capital is being encouraged at the cost of the public sector,” he emphasised. Mr. Yechury referred to the Visakhapatnam port along the east coast and Kandala port on the western coast whose revenue was being adversely affected by the private ports in the vicinity. The standing committee had said that major ports in the country “have turned out to be landlords.” “They are not interested in modernisation; only in the revenue coming from the rent earned from their property,” he pointed out. Mr. Yechury said that the “Look East” policy of the Centre was not possible without developing the Kolkata Port system. Dredgers should be arranged to take care of the draught at the Kolkata and Haldia ports. Inter-linkages with inland waterways should also be made to make the Kolkata port economically viable, he added. |
