You were the chief minister of Karnataka immediately after liberalisation. How did the states experience reforms?
Suddenly, it felt like we were liberated; we felt free. Until then, there were many restrictions on states, and we had to go to New Delhi for everything. P V Narasimha Rao was a very progressive Prime Minister. These days, chief ministers cannot constitute their council of ministers. They have to go to Delhi and sit with the high command, whether it is the Bharatiya Janata Party or the Congress or the Communist Party of India (Marxist).
Is the reform of the civil services the unfinished agenda of 1991?
Yes, it has remained unfinished. Even though we introduced some reforms in the periphery in accordance with my recommendations, wholesale changes were not undertaken. As a result, the most intelligent people are not able to make it through, and they shy away from entering the central services.
I don’t think the civil services should become relics. They should be alive, vibrant, and try to solve the problems of the country. Right now, there are very intelligent people, but in silos.
Formerly, even those from the Indian Institutes of Technology used to vie for these posts. They shy away now because they know that the services have become a little corrupt and they would be at the mercy of ministers. I worked out a transparent system by which the best officers can be selected in the examinations. It can still be done if my recommendations are implemented, and we will have a new avatar of the services.
In the ARC reports, you had highlighted how the Whitehall model has continued. Has there been any change since?
We looked at the models then prevalent in countries like France, England, and Australia. We covered all aspects of the administration and governance. My philosophy in the ARC was one of creative destruction, that continuing the same system would not serve our purpose.
Based on those suggestions, we did experiment to a certain extent. When Manmohan Singh was Prime Minister, we dismantled a lot of old systems and replaced them with new ones. We recommended that there should be decentralisation, that all ministries should be given absolute freedom.
Another of the ARC reports was on strengthening financial management systems. What are your views on the recent controversy over government data?
The ARC had stressed on the principle of subsidiarity. Nearly two decades later, states are still airing concerns over centralisation. Has devolution occurred to the extent you imagined?
There is a pronounced tendency to centralise now. My approach in the ARC was based on studying systems across the world. Centralisation will not take the country forward, either socially or economically.
We have given up the Plan and Non-plan programmes. We have dismantled the Planning Commission because it was felt that it was increasing centralisation. We have decided that there is no need for planning. But we created the NITI Aayog. When we dismantled the Planning Commission, there was no scope for creating a parallel organisation that ultimately works as a Planning Commission. That’s not going to help you.
States should be given a lot of freedom since they have to ultimately deliver. The Centre cannot deliver.
You recommended strengthening the Inter-State Council. However, its full meeting has not happened in quite a while. Your views?
I had suggested that it should not be ornamental; there should be a set agenda and no delays. It should be wound up if it is not serving the purpose, but otherwise there are so many inter-state issues that can be resolved with concrete discussions. These days, discussions are only confined to water-sharing disputes. Sometimes no decision is arrived at even on that. I think it has to be restructured as a concrete body that can deliver what it decides. It is just ornamental now.
What about the changes in the Companies Act, 2013?
Before I became corporate affairs minister [in 2011], industrialist JJ Irani had submitted an expert committee on company law. I called him and told him that an amendment to the 50-year-old Companies Act will not serve the purpose; things have changed fast. When Manmohan Singh had already opened up the economy in 1991, we should also open up everything without any compromise. That led to the Companies Act, 2013.
All over the world, corporate social responsibility was not based on the whims and fancies of corporations. I wanted companies with a turnover of over Rs 500 crore to set aside 2 per cent of profits for social objectives.
Manmohan Singh asked me if companies would revolt. I had consultations and enrolled all the big industrialists, like the Birlas and Ratan Tata. Ultimately, they agreed.
There must have been some resistance. How did you persuade them?
I said we have a social objective and there cannot be vertical development; it has to be spread all over. That will also help business. They realised that it helps them, too; they appreciated it. I don’t think there was any resistance.
You were responsible for setting up six universities when you were CM, but, more importantly, the common entrance test (CET). How do you view the current student unrest?
As chief minister, I had taken it up as a mission to firstly abolish capitation fees, because only the rich could become doctors and the system was not transparent. I introduced the CET through which only the deserving could get in.
Even today, there are no leaks in the CET because it is a foolproof system, built with technology that nobody could complain about. The big mistake with the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) is that they do not consider Class XII marks, which means even those with 45 per cent marks in Class XII can become doctors.
The first two reports of the ARC dealt with the Right to Information (RTI) and the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). Twenty years later, how do you see what has come of that?
RTI has now become a paper Act. It has been abused. It’s a system that should have been used to remove corruption in the country. It is the strongest weapon to do that. Corruption is a cancerous growth at both the state and central levels.
As far as MNREGA is concerned, it became successful even though people laughed at it. Even Prime Minister Narendra Modi laughed at it. But he reversed that opinion.
It was a transparent system, and we worked out methods for implementing it in our ARC report. Even now, it is not too late to bring MNREGA back.
The ARC laid a lot of emphasis on e-governance. Has it worked out the way you imagined back then?
It is the real fulcrum of administrative governance. With the development of technology, greater adoption will strengthen governance. E-governance is another very good instrument to eradicate corruption and delays.
