More than numbers

While the Central government can have small departments under the Concurrent List to coordinate with the states, there is no need to have large independent ministries in some areas to add to the paper work, legal interpretation and conflicts, in the process, making governance suffer

If Prime Minister Narendra Modi has a choice he may not like to expand the current size of his Council of Ministers to keep the government truly slim and trim to deliver maximum governance. The present 58-member Council of Ministers, including the Prime Minister, is bigger than the one he had at the start of his previous term. In 2014, Modi was sworn in with an initial Council of 46 ministers, including himself. Yet, before the end of the previous term, the NDA government had as many as 71 ministers, including the Prime Minister. Interestingly, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, in her budget speech, echoed the Prime Minister's sentiment linking the size of the government with the standard of governance.

However, the pressure may soon mount on Prime Minister Modi to expand his ministry for political reasons, keeping in mind BJP's expansionist policies in states such as West Bengal, where it has some long way to cover to grab the power, and others like Bihar governed by BJP and its alliance partners.

Legally, the Prime Minister can expand his Council of Ministers to have as many as 81 members. But, such an expansion will sizeably raise the government's budget expenditure without any effective return. According to the Constitution of India, the total number of ministers in the Council of Ministers must not exceed 15 per cent of the total number of members of Lok Sabha. Unfortunately, such an expansion to maximise the size of the government is bound to minimise governance.

The most powerful ministerial arms of the Central government are: Home Affairs, External Affairs, Defence, Finance, Industry cum Company Affairs and International Trade or Commerce. Ideally, the Union government should focus mostly on these areas. Departments may be clubbed under a ministry wherever possible. For instance, the industry ministry may cover all industries, including coal, steel, power, petroleum and pharmaceuticals. All traffic and transport departments, including rail, road, air and shipping, can come under one ministry. In India's federal system, the Union government shares power and responsibilities with state governments in a number of important areas under the Concurrent List.

The Centre would do well to leave a good part of the administration under the Concurrent List with the states. The latter covers as many as 52 areas, including health, education, food and agriculture, police, criminal and civil laws, jurisdiction of powers of all courts, excluding the Supreme Court, weights and measures, industrial promotion, tourism, forests, water, labour disputes, price control, electricity generation and distribution. While the Central government can have small departments under the joint list to coordinate with the states, there is no need to have large independent ministries in these areas to add to the paperwork, legal interpretation and conflicts, in the process, making governance suffer.

The Modi government may, at best, rearrange its ministries to accommodate a few more alliance members without expanding them. Some of BJP's ministers may be shifted to important party functions to strengthen the organisation. Such BJP leaders should not feel left out or be unhappy. For instance, present Home Minister Amit Shah held no less an important function in the party as its president in the last five years. Similarly, former health minister J P Nadda's hands may be full now as the national party's working president. In the last election, BJP had won 303 seats, increasing its independent majority further, while the other NDA members won 50 seats. The latter must not ignore the ratio of the seat share while demanding more ministerial berths in the government.

Political leaders must understand that to serve the people, they don't have to be ministers. After all, no Union government can have more than 81 ministers under the present Lok Sabha strength to serve the country's 1,300 million citizens. A smaller Council of Ministers means substantially lower expenditure on the government administration. The surplus funds may be deployed on development projects, which the country needs badly to push growth and create gainful employment.

On Prime Minister Modi's promise of "minimum government, maximum governance", he had earlier clarified his position in a media interview that "Char-Dhams are said to be sufficient for moksha, but files cannot redeem themselves even after passing through 32 places in government. I had to change this. You will be surprised to know that files reach me after just four to six stops in between. Cabinet notes used to take six months earlier. It takes 15 days now. Minutes of the meeting would be sent to me six months later for my signature. What nonsense! Now it is a rule that minutes should be approved within 15 days of the meeting. This is governance. This saves time and effort." The spirit must be fully understood and respected by the party and its alliance members. The expansion of the government will only dilute the spirit.

It is a general perception that the country has an oversized and bloated government which acts as a drag on economic efficiency and growth. Most political scientists and economists feel that large governments are bad for economic efficiency. However, there is little clarity on what the effective size of a government in a country. There is even less of a consensus on how the efficiency of a government should be measured. In general, most Indians believe that the Union government is too big and intrusive and should be downsized. In 2014, NDA led by Narendra Modi championed the slogan of "minimum government, maximum governance" to drive home the point of a small and lean government. Unfortunately, it failed to keep the promise. Now, this time, with even a bigger public mandate for BJP, the alliance leader, it may be the time for the Prime Minister to fulfil his ambition and set a trend for future governments in the country.

(The views expressed are strictly personal)