Shivraj Patil stays home

Shivraj Patil is not the only minister or MP who is dress conscious. It would not be surprising if today a politician sports clothes and items worth a few lakh rupees at a  time, which would include a branded  watch, bag, belt, shoes, perfume.

The branded goods industry is worth around Rs 12,000-13,000 crore today. Except for a few leaders, like communists, more or less every politician in the country is into using branded goods. One minister uses Louis Vuitton French fashion designer bags worth Rs 5 lakh; the range of these bags starts from anything upward of Rs 50,000. Yet another has a huge collection of designer shoes, which includes Gucci, Bally, Versace, and these are expensive brands. An Opposition leader is fond of collecting  exclusive glass frames like Cartier, Roberto Cavalli, Bvlgari. Yet another likes to buy the most expensive  electronics gadgets. Many wear luxury watches like Frank Muller, Corum, Roger Dubuis. There yet others who use expensive perfumes Cartier, Armani.

But Shivraj Patil was blasted by the media for changing his bandgala suit twice on the day of the bomb blasts In Delhi. A crestfallen minister asked how it was a crime to change after 13 hours of work. The media was incensed that the country’s home minister, who was expected to personally monitor the situation after the capital was caught in the throes of a serial terror attack, should have had the time to change clothes.

At one level, the three pictures of Patil that fateful Saturday, captured by cameras in a white, then a black and then again in a white suit, trivialised the issue. But they also provided visual proof of the home minister’s concerns that day and they came as the last straw that broke the camel’s back. Had it not been Shivraj Patil, and had there not been a history of the home minister’s ineptitude, the media might have ignored it.

Patil let the cat out of the bag when he said later that he had the blessings of his leader and would not quit as long as his leader was happy with him. His words showed that he thinks his primary task is to please his leader.  This was not a secretary of the Congress party talking but the home minister of India who has taken an oath under the Constitution, who is supposed to be accountable to the people of India, and to ensure their security and well-being.

That he continues in North Block, for all the criticism that has been leveled against him,  not just now but over the past many months,  shows that his leader-and he was obviously referring to Sonia Gandhi, not the Prime Minister — is happy with him and his performance.

Whether it was the lack of timely response to the Manipuri women in Imphal stripping themselves naked to shame the security forces after a rape and killing of a woman; or the neglect of the situation in Kashmir for two and a half months after the Amarnath row till it spun out of control; or the failure of his ministry to stem the growth of the Naxalites who now control 155 districts in the country; or the inability to stop the increasing number of terror attacks and catch those masterminding them,  it is a story of drift and worse.

When the nation was glued to TV channels, live for hours, showing the encounter in Delhi’s Jamia Nagar last Friday, which led to the capture of some of those supposed to be behind the Delhi blasts and the death of a brave policeman, Patil’s deputy Sriprakash Jaiswal was questioned by reporters. Jaiswal replied he had no information about the matter, and he would be able to comment once he received information after the encounter was over. Half the country had seen it all on their TV screens, but the MoS was oblivious of what was going on!  A day after the bomb blasts went off in Delhi, which sent shock waves throughout India, Jaiswal took off for Kanpur to inaugurate a store!

Last Wednesday, the Prime Minister called an emergency meeting of the Union Cabinet. Realising the gravity of the situation, ministers who were outside the capital rushed back for it. The grapevine was abuzz with speculation that Shivraj Patil might be replaced. In the wake of the Delhi blasts, There were rumours that either Kamal Nath or P Chidambaram might  move into North Block. The possibility of appointing a younger Congress leader as minister of state for internal security came under discussion, though how a junior mInister who would have to report to Shivraj Patil would be able to wave the magic wand and revamp the security setup and deliver was not clear.

In the run-up to the meeting, Sonia Gandhi held consultations with her senior party colleagues and  Shivraj Patil was not invited to them. Given public anger, Lalu Prasad Yadav also upped the ante against the home minister.  Several cabinet ministers had called on the Prime Minister to press for Patil’s exit. But when the cabinet meeting took place, no one said a word. Significantly, Dr Manmohan Singh kept urging his cabinet colleagues to speak up. Did they have any suggestions to make, he kept asking.    No voices were forthcoming. Lalu Prasad, who had first pitched for the replacement of Patil, was not even present at the Cabinet meeting which he had sought to discuss the anti-terror measures the government should take.

Shivraj Patil is believed to have survived the storm because his removal at this stage would have given further ammunition to the opposition already baying for the government’s blood, and because Sonia Gandhi feels she can rely on him.

However, the UPA continues to vacillate on the steps to tackle terror. As the head of the Administrative Reforms Commission which has submitted its report, Veerappa Moily gave the impression that the government would legislate a tough anti-terror law containing many of the provisions that existed in POTA, “strengthening the law as well as the safeguards”. But Priya Ranjan Das Munshi contradicted Moily two days later and held that existing laws were adequate to tackle the challenge of terror.

The Congress Party -and the government-remain divided on the steps to take, worried about annoying the minority community and equally concerned about unleashing a ‘Hindu backlash’. So far they have not demonstrated an ability to lead from up front the battle against terror, which has nothing to do with religion. This is a collective failure, and not one for which only Shivraj Patil must take the blame.

And yet Patil’s continuation raises the question: what is going to be the criteria for becoming and remaining a minister? Wearing good clothes? Keeping the leader happy? Or should it also have something to do with performance?