In appealing to opposition parties to co-operate with the government in solving urgent national problems, Mrs. Gandhi has struck a constructive note. It is necessary that the debate on vital issues is conducted in an atmosphere free from acrimony and distrust. But the greater responsibility in this regard is that of the government, especially of the Prime Minister. The opposition is too weak, fragmented and demoralized to set the tone for the country’s public life. It is not so much obstructionist as incompetent. To cite an example, it failed to exploit to its advantage the disclosures in the press of the former Maharashtra chief minister, Mr. Antulay’s dubious ways of raising funds for his trusts because it could not dig up a single new fact. And it singularly failed to expose his total disregard for the rule of law, his arbitrariness in dealing with officials and his emperor-like personalized style of rule, though this was as serious a problem as the abuse of office for collecting money. It talks a great deal about corruption and quite justifiably. But it is seldom able to collect hard evidence which can stand scrutiny.
Mrs. Gandhi has said that some of the opposition leaders have also indulged in corruption. The point is well taken. The moral standard of opposition leaders is not and cannot be much higher than of those in the Congress (I). Both are, as the saying goes, chips of the same block. But the former have held office only briefly and insecurely. Thus while it will be partisan to allege that only the Congress (I) leaders are corrupt, it is only natural that attention is focused on them. Their party has been in power most of the time since independence at the Centre and in most of the states and it cannot be seriously denied that of late corruption has assumed much greater proportions and that the corrupt have become much more brazen and daring. Again, this is a problem which Mrs. Gandhi alone can tackle. The opposition can at best put a certain amount of pressure on her.
The opposition also picks up issues on which it cannot press home the attack on the government, the prices and the IMF loan, for instance. As Mrs. Gandhi has pointed out, they have no case on either question. The inflationary pressure has eased and the IMF loan is a grim necessity for the country. Certain factors are responsible for keeping the retail prices high despite the drop in wholesale prices. The opposition has not suggested how the authorities can tackle these factors. And it is well known that the Janata government’s management of the economy is at least partly to blame for creating a situation which has made it obligatory for New Delhi to seek the IMF loan. But all this is no reason why the government and the opposition should not try to improve the political climate so that a civilized discourse is possible between them.