Its good that development as a topic of discussion takes a central stage in political discourses. But the most important thing which can be noted that the governments in its nomenclature is also termed out to be X parties government. When in democracy we adopted by naming a central and state govt. by parties. The political parties have a limited role to play in decision making exercise, which are supposed to be outcome of extensive research on the policy research, its impact and monitoring. 'Development' which till recently world over is thought about a serious exercise which does not mean going by party line (which often is not an outcome of well researched agenda) but by analysis of the data given through national or state level surveys. During the discourse we are into the position of easily projecting an development ideologies which stands on the political ideology and of course which totally differs from the theoretical bases. The schemes which can be objectively targeted at the development needs of the people emerges to be treating to the political needs of the parties.
The good research output suggestive of a policy which might be emerging from the burning of night oil by the numerous support staff (you may call them researches) often turning to be night mare to convince the political bosses. How on earth development issues can be limited to political parties without institutional backup. Are parties suppose to run a parallel institutional network? Or the institutions also become politicised to give feed accordingly to the political class. The individuals in the recent political arena tries to make the policies based on the their believes which in most of the cases are poorly analysed by themselves. The polarisation of the parties in the national issues is also resulting in the policy polarisaiton on the party lines. To some extent these are good to understand the good and bad outcome expected of the decisions taken by a political leaders. But do we essentially mean to say that the system is not in place to find the problems, discuss with people for verification and solutions. Development to wide spectrum of people means illusion created by the political masters. The populism of the policy depends more on the freebies which in long run may not be fruitful.
There is little doubt about the political parties in asserting their wish to the policy makers, when they themselves become the policy makers by not just discussing it among themselves also creating a no question mode for the people, the problem of acceptance arises. The serious development analysis in these scenarios take a back seat. The state governments now if seen from the political perspectives may stand in front of central governments in accepting the major political decisions or even rediculing the central decisions. Same in the case of the grass root democratic setup a situation of distress arises when the basic policy intentions and guidelines are violated. We are in a situation when more we look into the problems we try to find the quick answers which are of course short lived. Certain conflict in the policy approach or infighting between the political class has seen as loss of good opportunity in sharing the best of all.
The good research output suggestive of a policy which might be emerging from the burning of night oil by the numerous support staff (you may call them researches) often turning to be night mare to convince the political bosses. How on earth development issues can be limited to political parties without institutional backup. Are parties suppose to run a parallel institutional network? Or the institutions also become politicised to give feed accordingly to the political class. The individuals in the recent political arena tries to make the policies based on the their believes which in most of the cases are poorly analysed by themselves. The polarisation of the parties in the national issues is also resulting in the policy polarisaiton on the party lines. To some extent these are good to understand the good and bad outcome expected of the decisions taken by a political leaders. But do we essentially mean to say that the system is not in place to find the problems, discuss with people for verification and solutions. Development to wide spectrum of people means illusion created by the political masters. The populism of the policy depends more on the freebies which in long run may not be fruitful.
There is little doubt about the political parties in asserting their wish to the policy makers, when they themselves become the policy makers by not just discussing it among themselves also creating a no question mode for the people, the problem of acceptance arises. The serious development analysis in these scenarios take a back seat. The state governments now if seen from the political perspectives may stand in front of central governments in accepting the major political decisions or even rediculing the central decisions. Same in the case of the grass root democratic setup a situation of distress arises when the basic policy intentions and guidelines are violated. We are in a situation when more we look into the problems we try to find the quick answers which are of course short lived. Certain conflict in the policy approach or infighting between the political class has seen as loss of good opportunity in sharing the best of all.
