November 27, 2002
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Home >
Money > Special November 27, 2002 |
Feedback
|
|
|
Why Vajpayee isn't important for WEFA K Bhattacharya In the late eighties, the annual India Economic Summit organised by the World Economic Forum was almost completely out of bounds for the media. Journalists could not gain access even to the WEF booklet that would contain the list of participants and their brief biographical details. Most of the sessions were closed to the media. Only the opening or the closing session, featuring the prime minister or the finance minister, could be accessed by journalists. And once the chief guest completed his address, members of the media would be politely escorted out of the meeting room. There was a purpose behind all this. Public policy-makers were reluctant to share their views with industry leaders if the media was there to print those in the newspapers the next morning. Even industry members preferred closed-door sessions because they knew that the ministers would lay bare their hearts only when the media was not around. This was a view endorsed even by Tarun Das, the man who built CII and helped WEF's annual events become the big draw that they are today. Those days, Das's own organisation would keep its national council meetings out of bounds for the media. Things have changed since then. Just as CII's many national council meetings in the last few years have been thrown open to the media, almost all the sessions at WEF's India Economic Summit can now be accessed by journalists. Yes, there are still a few closed-door sessions. But media representatives are allowed to take part in those sessions with a rider that they are not free to report the proceedings. This change over the years had a major impact on the WEF's annual shows. Along with the annual general meetings of the country's apex industry chambers, the India Economic Summit became another big media event and a draw for business leaders from within the country and abroad. The presence of the prime minister, important Cabinet ministers in the government and senior secretaries made it an annual event which no one wanted to miss. And if you wanted to know what direction the government's economic policies would take, the WEF's annual meeting in New Delhi every winter was the answer. But even as the India Economic Summit became a part of the calendar of India's main economic events, it lost its unique character, which for many years was its main appeal. The Summit was a forum where senior functionaries of the government would speak with candour and share their frank views on economic policy issues. More than official policy pronouncements from ministers, participants would return home with a deeper understanding of the direction economic policies in India would take in the medium term. But why should government functionaries speak frankly and openly if they know that they would be reported the next morning? So, gradually, the ministers and secretaries at the Summit sessions became more cautious and spoke only as much as could be shared in public. The quality of debate at the brainstorming sessions suffered as a result. This was a growing conflict. The WEF Summit organisers had begun competing with the national industry organisations to gain media mileage. Indeed, they gained that mileage quite handsomely. But in the process they also lost their core and unique advantage. Worse, while chasing the new target of media publicity, they forgot to change the basic format in which the Summit was conceived. Once you took away the spirit of uninhibited exchange of views and ideas among the participants, be they government functionaries or economic thinkers, the original charm of the WEF Summits was also lost. A regular feature of the WEF annual meeting was a frank assessment of the Indian economy and the policies of the government. This assessment used to be presented by WEF economist, Claude Smadja, just before the start of the Summit. Nothing went wrong as long as the ministers could discuss that assessment in a closed-door session. But once the ministers had to publicly defend everything that they had done or not done, the annual assessment by Smadja became a major problem and an embarrassment for the government. This was a manifestation of the growing conflict between the content and the format in which the Summit was being conducted. Eventually, the WEF dropped the annual exercise of presenting an assessment of the Indian economy. For Prime Minister Vajpayee, therefore, attending the WEF Summit would make sense only if he could have the political conviction of either doing some plain talking in public or persuading the Summit organisers to hold a closed-door session with him for a frank discussion. Given the current scenario, Mr Vajpayee is unlikely to exercise either of the options because of their obvious adverse political consequences. Which is why, perhaps, he decided to skip the Summit this year. In fact, what is true for Mr Vajpayee is equally valid for other ministers in his Cabinet. Thus, it is no surprise that Tarun Das should wonder why nobody had earlier thought of holding the WEF Summit's inaugural session without a prime minister or a finance minister. Whatever may be the facts of the case, the presence of either the prime minister or the finance minister would have only added to the Summit's glamour. Given their constraints, neither of them would have contributed to the richness of debates at the Summit. Which is why Mr Vajpayee would remain unimportant for the Summit - till at least such time the WEF resumes holding closed-door sessions and the prime minister agrees to share his views at such a forum. Powered by ALSO READ:
|
ADVERTISEMENT |
||||||||||||
