Why Do Politicians Say Or Do Such Things?
Linus tackles things head-on. He takes sides in his analysis and it fits excellently with our editorial policy. No 'maybe's' and 'allegedly' for him, only things in black and white.
View all posts by this Author
By Linus Garg
First publised on 2023-01-24 15:42:38
About the Author
Linus tackles things head-on. He takes sides in his analysis and it fits excellently with our editorial policy. No 'maybe's' and 'allegedly' for him, only things in black and white.
View all posts by this Author
Governments and politicians often say and do things that are not logical and it shows that they think people are fools.
Three recent examples prove this.
In the first, Rajasthan chief minister said that reverting to the old pension scheme will reduce corruption. Who was he trying to fool? The old pension scheme was in place till 2004. Was there no corruption then? It is sad that just to create problems for the BJP-ruled Central government, opposition states, mainly those governed by the Congress, are trying to revert to the economically-debilitating old pension scheme despite the fact that the new pension scheme was introduced by the Congress party in 2004. By linking the pension scheme to corruption, Gehlot showed that he does not understand how the new scheme is beneficial to both the government and the employees.
Then, in the recent protest against Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) president B S Singh for allegedly sexually harassing female wrestlers, the government, instead of removing him from the post, went after Vinod Tomar, the assistant secretary of WFI for supporting Singh. By suspending Tomar, the government recognized that the charges against Singh were serious and he should not be supported. But then, why not remove him and why remove Tomar who supported him?
Finally, when Prime Minister Modi was interacting with bureaucrats recently, he advised them to ignore over-regulation and mindless compliance and work for the benefit of the people. That proved that the Prime Minister recognized that the bureaucrats were burdened with over-regulation and a maze of compliance that was not always needed. But why ask them to ignore what is in the rule book at the risk of getting a bad mark in their career? Why not simply identify such over-regulatory rules and mindless compliance burden and remove them from the rules books? Will that not make life easy for both the bureaucrats and the citizens and perhaps reduce corruption and make governance people-friendly?
