The Hindu : Front Page : “In an era of coalitions, State-level issues will dominate”

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, May 08, 2009
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

Front Page

Front Page

“In an era of coalitions, State-level issues will dominate”

No party has remained in the same front for two successive elections

Ever since the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) was ousted from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam-led front in Tamil Nadu in June last, it has been under the political spotlight. In late March, the PMK joined the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK)-led combine in Tamil Nadu, becoming the first party to finalise an electoral deal with Ms. Jayalalithaa. S. Ramadoss, the PMK’s founder-leader, asserts that his party’s partnership with the AIADMK will continue after the Lok Sabha election. He spoke to T. RAMAKRISHNAN.

Which are the major issues you are highlighting in the election?

Of course, the Sri Lankan Tamils issue is the foremost. Though the United Progressive Alliance government at the Centre comprises many parties, it is the Congress that is essentially responsible for foreign policy. At the time of formulation of the Common Minimum Programme, it was on my insistence that the issue was included in the document. But, the Congress has not fulfilled the commitment despite our highlighting the issue several times. The fertiliser shortage, price rise, unremunerative prices to cane farmers and acquisition of farmlands under the name of establishing special economic zones are among the other issues.

Most parties are highlighting State-level issues even though this is a parliamentary election. Is this the proper approach?

It may not appear proper, but it is inevitable. Except in 1977, when the Emergency was the theme all over the country, State-level issues have dominated every time. Besides, the strength of national parties has declined over the years. Consequently, regional parties have become stronger. That’s why the focus is on State-level issues. Take the case of [Bihar Chief Minister] Nitish Kumar. Instead of talking about national issues, Mr. Nitish Kumar criticises [Rashtriya Janata Dal leader] Lalu Prasad and highlights the misdeeds of the 15-year rule of Mr. Lalu Prasad and his party. Even the Communist parties, which raise the issue of secularism, turn to State-level issues when they campaign here. In an era of coalitions, State-level issues will necessarily get highlighted.

What about the criticism that regional parties are obstacles to development?

The Congress, on its own, ruled the country for 50 years. Then the BJP [Bharatiya Janata Party] was in power for six years. For the last five years, the UPA has been in office. What improvement did they bring about? Earlier, the Congress spoke about poverty eradication. Now, it says poverty reduction. In recent years, there has been too much stress on high growth. Who is the major beneficiary of economic policies? The rich have become richer and the poor poorer. PC [Union Home Minister and former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram] has neglected the primary sector.

Take the case of the “BIMARU” [Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh] States, which remain backward in many areas including health and education. Is it not they [the Congress] who ruled these States for 50 years?

Except on the Sri Lankan Tamils issue, you have been soft on the Congress while electioneering. Will you tie up with the Congress post-poll?

I have been saying from the beginning that our party will abide by what [AIADMK general secretary] Jayalalithaa decides with regard to the post-poll scenario.

Even when we were in the UPA, we had expressed our opinions strongly on those issues that deserved public attention. When the Union government waived farm loans of Rs. 72,000 crore, I emphasised that the basic causes should be remedied. I argued for the creation of small States. We were very vocal on the OBC [reservation for Other Backward Classes in institutions of higher learning] issue.

What about the criticism that the AIADMK-PMK tie-up is an opportunistic alliance?

Ours is a natural alliance. Both of us — PMK and the AIADMK — adhere to the alliance dharma. It was in 1967 that the era of coalitions began in Tamil Nadu.

Rajaji’s Swatantra party and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) were opposed to each other in their economic philosophies.

While the DMK called themselves rationalists, the Forward Bloc members were believers.

All these parties came together and formed an alliance in 1967. Since then, no party has remained in the same front for two successive elections. Tell me, where does the question of opportunism arise?

Will you stick to the AIADMK-led front? Is the understanding with the AIADMK a long term one or is it confined only to the parliamentary elections?

We will continue in the front. Yes, the alliance has been arrived at keeping long-term interests in mind.

Do you think that the Third Front not projecting anyone as Prime Minister is a handicap?

Several leaders of the Third Front have already answered this point. When V.P. Singh, [H.D.] Deve Gowda, [P.V.] Narasimha Rao, [I.K.] Gujral and Manmohan Singh became Prime Ministers, they were not projected for the post during the elections. It’s only the BJP that had projected [Atal Bihari] Vajpayee earlier.

Now, they are projecting [L.K.]Advani. Not projecting anyone will not have any adverse impact.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page