:: P.C. Alexander

Poll allies must share power, accountability

Dr P.C. Alexander

With just seven to eight months to go for general elections, political parties have started their moves for firming up electoral alliances. This would not have been necessary if the country had a healthy party system with three-four political parties having national presence for the electorate to choose from. With the decline in strength of the two largest parties in Lok Sabha, the Congress and the BJP, there is little chance of any single party forming a government on its own. A coalition government, therefore, is inevitable at the Centre. In a situation like this there is nothing wrong if political parties look for electoral alliances. However, past experience of electoral alliances has shown that most of them were opportunistic alliances just to get to power, without bothering about the norms and principles that must be followed in a healthy system of parliamentary democracy. Based on past experiences, in the states and at the Centre, a few important "Dos and Don’ts" in the formation of electoral alliances can be identified.

The first and most important requirement of an electoral alliance is that it should be between parties which have, in this era of globalisation, a reasonable degree of ideological compatibility on economic reforms and foreign policy. The worst instance of violation of this principle was the government formed by UPA in 2004 with the support offered from outside by the 60 MP-strong Left parties. There can be differences between political parties on the priorities and direction of economic reforms and foreign policy issues. But if there is a genuine will to evolve a consensus, such differences will not become obstructions in the working of the government. But in the case of the Congress leading the UPA, and the CPI(M) leading the Left parties and supporting the government from outside, there was no common ground at all on these issues. In fact, they held diametrically opposite views. The situation was further complicated by the fact that for the CPI(M) the Congress is its principal rival in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura — the three states where it is in power. It was, therefore, most incongruous for two such parties, who have been continuously at each other’s throat for over three decades, to agree to cooperate in running the government at the Centre. Every one who knew how bitter the relations have been between the Congress and the CPI(M), knew that this was a prescription for failure from the very beginning.

It may be argued that there was no "alliance" between the UPA and the Left parties, and that there was only an agreement by the Left parties to lend support to the UPA government based on a Common Minimum Programme (CMP) endorsed by both sides. But the UPA could not have ventured to form a government in 2004 without the promise of support from the Left parties and, therefore, the support was as good as an alliance. However, it was soon found that in actual practice the supporting parties had no intention of making any concession regarding their own stand on economic reforms or foreign policies, and the UPA had to yield on every occasion to the de facto veto of the Left parties, causing considerable embarrassment to itself and, particularly, to the Congress. The 2009 Parliamentary elections alone will show the extent of damage this illogical alliance has caused to the Congress party. Experience of this alliance will be a warning to all alliance seekers in future, rather than an example to emulate.

Another requirement for the success of electoral alliances is that they should be formed well before elections and not be cobbled up after elections with the sole objective of getting a majority in Parliament. In a healthy parliamentary democracy, a majority is gained or lost through the ballot box and not through hurried confabulations between a few leaders after elections. An agreement on the basis of a post-election CMP may help some parties to form a government, but it cannot be a substitute for the people’s mandate obtained through the election process.

Even if an alliance wins on the basis of the CMP placed before voters before the elections, it cannot claim to be the final agenda for any government. At best, it reflects priorities at the time of being presented to the people. The government should have the flexibility to come up with new programmes and projects in the interest of good governance as and when required.

Two other basic principles of electoral alliances have to be unreservedly accepted by all members of the alliance if the alliance is to be smooth and successful. These are:

l Primacy of the Prime Minister in the Council of Ministers

l Collective responsibility of all ministers for all Cabinet decisions

Unfortunately, these two fundamental principles were not strictly followed during the 60s when the Samyuktah Vidyak Dal (SVD) governments were in power in several states. During the SVD years, groups of MLAs belonging to different political parties formed coalition governments at regular intervals by pulling down existing ones through defections or by acquiring new allies and supporters. This was the notorious "Aya Ram Gaya Ram" era and brought a great deal of discredit to the parliamentary system. The chief ministers in many states had difficulties to bring their ministers, belonging to other parties, under the discipline of collective responsibility. In some cases, the chief ministers found their authority challenged or subverted by their coalition partners in the Cabinet.

Parliamentary democracy will collapse if electoral alliances lead to violation of the well-known principles of primacy of the chief minister/Prime Minister and collective responsibility of all ministers, irrespective of party affiliations.

Finally, a very important lesson which has to be drawn from the failure of some coalition governments in the past is that no government should be formed unless the allies constituting the coalition have themselves the required majority without having to depend on support from outside. If a political party wishes to extend support from outside, without joining as a partner in the government, it should be welcomed by the parties forming government. But, such support should be totally unconditional. Otherwise, it will be tantamount to handing over to such parties the "right of veto" proposals they do not approve of. Power has to go with accountability and, therefore, no parties supporting the government from outside should have a share of power, directly or indirectly, in a parliamentary system of democracy.

Dr P.C. Alexander was the governor of Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra