By Patricia Mukhim
We humans push ourselves from day to day because we nurture fond hopes that the morrow will be better. Now that we are bracing ourselves for the biggest circus of democracy – the 2023 elections we are all yearning desperately for CHANGE. There are of course cynics and the ‘can’t be cured hopefuls’ (what a terrific match) who are already counting constituencies and have predicted that we will have the same government of the NPP-UDP combine. When asked if they are writing off the BJP they quip that BJP might win just the two old seats! And these are people who gauge the public pulse sitting in the comfort of their homes because it’s too strenuous to undertake a tour of this state with its horrifyingly dangerous craters in the middle of what was once a road.
These days its more engaging to have a conversation with younger people because they move around and have their ears to the ground. So yes, we all want CHANGE but who will lead the change. I just read Ken Blanchard’s book, “Who Killed Change?” which is a provocative read on why change is difficult. Blanchard personalizes ‘Change’ and turns him into a character that is surrounded by a host of characters that all want Change to die. They include Culture, Commitment, Sponsorship, Plan, Budget, Urgency, Vision, Communication, Performance Management, Accountability, Trainer, Incentive and the Change Leadership Team itself. In dramatizing how Change was finally killed in an organization and how all the above dramatis personae were involved in one way or the other in the murder of Change, Blanchard demonstrates with rare insights how difficult it is to bring change. Culture or our way of doing things, of reasoning of coming to conclusions forming opinions and acting in certain ways are so much part of our consciousness that we are afraid of stepping out of this known behaviour. So while it is easy to talk of change, how much are we personally willing to change our habits, thoughts, and tease out all the ingrained ideas that make us quickly form our deep-seated opinions?
If we are ourselves resistant to changing our deeply ingrained habits, including the time we get up and go to bed, what we read or whether we even read at all, and whether we even try and speak to people we disagree with if only to better understand why we disagree with that person, then how hard it is to change? And if change at the personal level is like climbing a tall mountain, then how do we expect change in the body politic?
The people of Himachal Pradesh we are told change their government every five years. I think that’s an intelligent move by the electorate. In the case of Meghalaya, why should people vote back a government that has been part of the rice scam (enquiry report still not out in the public domain), the smart meter scam (enquiry report pending), Assembly dome collapse, of poverty shooting up to 37%, border problems yet unresolved with Assam getting more acrimonious, the roads in the worst shape ever and most basic governance issues such as addressing the traffic jams in Shillong city having to be pushed by the High Court. No one knows how the next government will be or who will form one. Its enough to know that the same people who meddled around with the state’s finances and don’t believe they are accountable for how funds are deployed should NOT return for a second term.
Someone the other day had expressed in a letter that new faces with fresh ideas should be given an opportunity to demonstrate their skills in finance management, in rural entrepreneurship especially in places where there is over-dependence on subsistence farming and clearing off forests for timber. The rate at which trees are being cut in all of Jaintia Hills either for firewood, timber or for producing charcoal is frightening. If you talk about this rampant deforestation people say, “What will we do then if we cannot even cut forests? How do we earn?” The clutch of environmental conservation rules and laws become a joke in the face of this lived reality. All kinds of schemes such as the Joint Forest Management scheme and others like it are good for official records. They don’t work on the ground and there’s no supervisory mechanism either. That’s how good laws are in Meghalaya. I sometimes wonder why we need such a huge secretariat and a Department for Environment and Forests when the State has control on only 4-5% of forests? Aren’t the Forest officials underworked? Sadly even in reserved forests where forest guards are posted, trees are regularly felled. And does anyone want a change here? No, we are all comfortable with the status quo.
There are a batch of young and enterprising candidates entering the fray this time. They have the benefit of having worked and studied outside the state and seem enthusiastic enough to bring that CHANGE that many yearn for. Unfortunately, they are not all from the same party; they belong to different parties so how will they converge to bring about a coalition that is concerned about the persisting problems in the State of Meghalaya. This is a matter that is being avidly discussed in tea shops and funerals.
Let’s remember that people in Meghalaya don’t vote party or ideology. It is about the person. In urban constituencies people require regular supply of water, power, good roads and smooth travel. Of course the youth need jobs so anyone who can show how he/she has convincing ideas about job creation outside the over-stuffed government sector is sure to win votes. In rural areas there are huge development gaps. Roads are in poor shape so communication is a dilemma. Taking their produce to the markets is still a persistent challenge for farmers who are still getting a raw deal despite the attempts by the Farmers’ Commission to come up with more creative farming ideas. It is rural Meghalaya that is pulling down all the indicators to the tail end of the graph. It is rural Meghalaya that actually needs a strong dose of CHANGE and must elect more politically astute and educationally competent MLAs. Enough of semi-literate people who can’t read and decipher the budget and therefore cannot make meaningful interventions during the budget session.
Frankly speaking people are actually fatigued by the same rhetoric from over-exposed faces. They want to see fresh ideas and a new vision for Meghalaya – a vision that we never crafted in 50 years. What a shame!
The CHANGE we need in 2023 are the following:
Stop electing businessmen to the State Legislature: They use their positions only to improve their own wealth ranking and their productive time is spent in getting government businesses.
Stop electing uneducated men/women: An uneducated person does not understand how a pathetically inadequate education system can pull down generations of youth. Also an uneducated person is easily misled by shrewd bureaucrats who actually tell them how to do things instead of the other way round.
Stop electing those with a history of corruption: Some in the present MDA Government have blazed a trail in corruption. Now in the last leg of their tenures as MLAs and ministers they are trying to do a whitewashing job. If we continue to elect these same people, we are normalizing corruption as some in the bureaucracy have learnt to do.
So who do we elect then?
Elect people who have their own ideas to sell and will not waste their election speeches on castigating their rivals.
Elect new faces and give them a try at legislation for 5 years rather than vote the tried, tested and found wanting variety.
Elect those with care and concern for the environment which is fast losing its capacity for regeneration.
Its high time we do a Performance Management Test on our sitting legislators; more so those who have been ministers and disastrous ones at that. Because of our long suffering attitude these ministers have continued to stick to their chairs despite their abject failure to run their departments. Performance Management is a process that sets goals and expectations regarding the behaviour and results that will enable change.
Why can’t the people of Meghalaya ask the North Eastern Hill University to design a Performance Management Test on the current set of legislators? What has this University done to add value to our social and political life outside the campus? What is the Political Science and Sociology Department doing to enlighten us on voting behaviour and its long-term consequences on the development of the State? We the people of Meghalaya have to start questioning NEHU and other institutions set up here if they have added value to the State of Meghalaya and to its people. Elections are not just a fanfare. They must mean something and all institutions must converge to build up a more robust public opinion on who and how to vote.
If we want CHANGE in 2023 we need to work hard on the ground. Mere talk and wishful thinking won’t work!