My Report Debate: Coalition Governments Reflect India’s Diversity

Experience shows that coalition government is better placed to reconcile conflicting interests, argues Pramod Misra.

(Pramod K Misra’s essay is among the Top 10 of the My Report Debate. Participants were asked the question: Who do you think should lead India ­– a single party or a coalition?)

With elections round the corner, the debate whether India should be led by a single party or a coalition is gaining currency. Arguments are being advanced for a strong and stable single party government as against a weak and unstable coalition lacking decisiveness. An objective relook at the history of our Republic however does not support the argument. Single party majority governments may at times remain politically unstable and coalition governments in themselves need not be unstable always.

The first non-Congress Janata Party government at the Centre in 1977 had an absolute majority and yet it was marred by instability and fell within two years. On the other hand, PV Narasimha Rao’s government completed its full term initiating remarkable economic reforms despite being a ‘minority’ government.

Similarly, Rajiv Gandhi government, voted to power with unprecedented majority of over 400 seats in 1984, lost considerable political goodwill towards the end of its term. What followed was a ‘hung’ Parliament and an era of coalition governments with no single party getting a majority of its own for 25 years between 1989 and 2014.

We should remember that the fall of governments led by Charan Singh, VP Singh, Chandrashekhar, Deve Gowda and IK Gujral were because of the withdrawal of outside support by the Congress party.

Coalition partners, on the other hand, remained intact. Coalitions in themselves do not contribute to instability as has been amply demonstrated by the three governments of Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh.

One can argue that political survival or stability can never be an end in itself and the government should be strong enough to take tough decisions for the betterment of the people. The two tough decisions flaunted in support of the present government are surgical strike and demonetisation, although the desirability of bragging about the former and sagacity of the latter are both questionable. Looking back we find the previous coalition government also taking tough political stand on Indo-US nuclear deal by putting its own survival at risk. Similarly, Vajpayee government’s tough posturing resulted in the Kargil victory.

With respect to the nation’s economic progress, on almost all major financial parameters, the country achieved much faster economic growth during the coalition years as compared to the periods of strong single party majority governments. Political freedom and democratic institutions have also been much more secure during the coalition era than under single party dominance rule. Our federal structure could also acquire its true meaning only during coalition period. We have witnessed repeated onslaughts on civil liberties and constitutional values during the times of strong but insecure governments. India consists of diverse realities and a government that does not represent them can never be truly democratic.

No meaningful and lasting growth, whether economic, social or political, can ever be achieved without successful attempts at assimilation of this diversity. The challenge of democratic governance demands constant attempts at reconciliation of these often conflicting interests. Experience shows that a coalition government is better placed to achieve such results.

(All 'My Report' branded stories are submitted by citizen journalists to The Quint. Though The Quint inquires into the claims/allegations from all parties before publishing, the report and the views expressed above are the citizen journalist's own. The Quint neither endorses, nor is responsible for the same.)