Narendra Modi vs. Manmohan Singh

Thanks again to Cermank! I will be addressing Pro's case now (from R1).OVERVIEWThroughout much of this debate, Pro claims that Singh is merely the puppet, and Gandhi is the puppeteer. I would like to take some time to dispel this notion before I get into the substance of the debate.Firstly, I would ask Pro to provide credible evidence, not mere speculation, that Singh is indeed at Gandhi's beck and call. Next, I would point out that much of the recent criticism of Singh as being only nominally in charge is the result of electoral backstabbing rather than well-reasoned accusations. Notably, the most recent, supposed expose, written by Sanjaya Baru, is tainted by potential election bias. Baru, a Congress loyalist, slams Singh for the exact reasons given by Pro, yet his own interest in the matter seems to disqualify him as in impartial source. "Congress expects a heavy defeat when national election results are broadcast on May 16th. It needs a scapegoat. The blame game began last month" with the book by Baru. [1]Certainly, the BJP and their allies' criticism of Singh is apt to be skewed, and so it seems that both sides of the aisle have motives to sully Singh's name unfair: one to create a convenient scapegoat, the other to undermine its opposition. It therefore makes it hard to evaluate the credibility of any of these claims about Singh.And, even critics of Singh admit: "Manmohan Singh was not always a passive puppet in the hands of a scheming Sonia Gandhi. He could be quite scheming himself when an issue dear to his heart came up. The passing of the US nuclear treaty is the most quoted example. Almost all parties, including sections of his own, were against it, but the Prime Minister stuck to his guns and had his way. So did he with FDI in retail which was, and still is, opposed by most states. He used craftiness, guile and every ounce of power at his disposal to push these measures through." [2]Combined, the admission by his detractors that he did retain the ability to push through key programs, as well as the dubious credibility of the sources who cast aspersions upon him, lead me to doubt Pro's claims that Singh was merely a puppet PM.SINGH IS A WEAK PMPro claims that Singh is weak, but then goes on to note that there is no evidence the he engages in corruption and that he successfully brought about a key nuclear deal helping to ease tensions on the subcontinent. That does not seem like the action of a weak PM.The claims about Singh's lack of control in his cabinet are best addressed by my overview, as the implication is that Gandhi is the one with real power. As for the allegations of permitting corruption to unfold, in all of the scams mentioned by Pro, legal action is being, or has been taken. The PM must allow the judicial process to occur, which takes time. Moreover, Pro has pointed to three scandals, but this does not prove that Singh's administration was exceptionally corrupt in comparison to other administrations, nor does it prove that corruption was the fault of Singh--if factors beyond his control were the underlying causes, then he cannot necessarily be blamed.The point about rape seems underwhelming when we consider that the Indian government under Singh has cracked down on rapes, even strengthening penalties for rapists. It is now, in certain case, possible to receive the death penalty in India for raping someone. [3]POLICIESFirstly, let's not assail the focus on universal coverage so hastily. Only 58.5% of males and 48.7% of girls attended secondary school between 2008 and 2012 (net). [4] Certainly, it does not matter if the system is stellar if no one shows up, and it is better to give all students a basic education than leave huge swaths of the population out of the system altogether. Therefore, it seems as if Singh's approach on including students is actually a crucial part of the education equation, and it's worked: in 2011, more students had enrolled than in previous years of his administration. [5]Secondly, the Singh administration has focused on quality of education as well, and it is disingenuous to suggest otherwise. It launch RMSA in 2009 to improve the quality of education in India's schools by promoting vocational and technical training, enhancing facilities at schools, retaining teachers to reduce class sizes, and enacting curriculum reforms. So far, it has made massive strides in its objectives, particularly in promoting vo/tech training and improving school facilities. These successes were affirmed in RMSA's 2013 report, and seek to address the lack of infrastructure that was a major barrier to quality issues. [6, 5] Finally, Con's source (no. 6) took me to an article that had nothing to do with education. I did a Crtl+F search for the words "education," "PISA" and "students" and I got no hits.As for the job-related arguments, I am interested to know if Pro thinks Modi could do better. Pro notes, regarding the labor restructuring law, that the "bills have been stuck in the parliament for years, with people bickering over it for years." If this is the case, Modi may be unable to successfully pass these laws himself, and, with his timid approach to the economy thus far (I'll get to this later) it also seems unlikely he'll act decisively on this issue. This argument also applies to the agricultural sector point: how will Modi be any better?Let's now turn to Modi.MODI IS STRONGJust because a leader is a firebrand who can generate mass support, that does not make him strong. Arguably, Modi is just as cautious as Singh in terms of their government policies. Modi's first budget was widely described as "cautious" and lacking in "bold reforms." [7, 8] Some even point out that "the budget clearly indicates that the overall thrust and tenor of the current government's economic policies and programmes are not very different from the market-friendly agenda followed by the previous government in Delhi, led by the Congress party." [9]Issues with the budget include its failure to repeal the controversial and damaging "retroactive tax law" that has been hitting companies like Vodafone. Policies like these scare away investors, and Modi's lack of action is troubling here. [7, 8] Additionally, "Standard & Poor's, which has long warned India that it may lose its investment grade rating unless the government works harder to balance its finances, said the budget did not change its assessment." [8]Ultimately, "expectations had been high that Prime Minister Narendra Modi would use India's strongest election mandate in 30 years to take radical steps comparable to the 1991 market reforms that unleashed an era of high economic growth." [8] As Pro said herself, Modi is a decisive leader who takes decisive action. Well, his budget was anything but radical and decisive. If anything, it merely continued Singh's policies with minor changes.MODI: ISSUESAs I pointed out earlier, Singh's RMSA plan is "opening up recognitions for a lot of schools that were providing quality education but were just not adequate in terms of physical infrastructure," which is exactly what Pro claims Modi is doing. Also, "Gujarat today is a rich State with poor education and health outcomes. An evaluation of key education indicators over time reveals that the improvement of Gujarat in literacy rates is sluggish as compared to the rest of India. Gujarat’s ranking in terms of literacy rate deteriorated from the fifth to the seventh for both 6 years and above, and 6-14 years age group among 15 major States between 2000 and 2008. In terms of proportion of the people who are currently attending any educational institution, Gujarat’s rank has deteriorated from the 21st to the 26th (6th to 10th among major 15 States) for the age group of 6-14 years during this period and the gender gap in literacy levels of 20 per cent and those currently attending school (13.3 per cent) in the age group of 11 to 14 is also higher in Gujarat in comparison with other States." [10]Certainly, those aggressive jobs policies Pro discusses are not being enacted on the national level, as evidenced by Modi's budget. Consider the following: in Gujarat, GDP may have grown, but "only a careful look at the performance figures, in terms of employment, wages, consumption, poverty, inequality, and outcomes in health and education, reveals that this broad based growth has resulted in worrisome outcomes...The biggest casualty of the ‘successful’ growth in Gujarat (and least discussed) is employment. The aggregate employment in Gujarat has remained stagnant (NSSO data shows growth in employment for the period 1993-94 to 2004-05 was 2.69 percentage per annum, whereas for 2004-05 to 2009-10 it came down to almost zero)...In the last five years, the rural and urban per capita monthly consumption expenditure in Gujarat grew at much lower rates, compared to the national average and growth in other comparable States." [10]SOURCES1 - http://www.economist.com...2 - http://www.newindianexpress.com...3 - http://www.ask.com...4 - http://www.unicef.org...5 - http://indiatoday.intoday.in...6 - http://www.ask.com...7 - http://fortune.com...8 - http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com...9 - http://www.bbc.com...10 - http://www.thehindu.com...