The term shouldn’t mean knee-jerk opposition to anything emanating from the Centre
The objection to the establishment of the National Counter Terrorism Centre by as many as 12 chief ministers highlights a common theme that has been plaguing governance. For the last six months, ‘federalism’ has been the war cry used to stymie policy decisions and important legislations ranging from the Lokpal Bill and FDI in multi-brand retail to the goods and services tax (GST), the Teesta water-sharing agreement with Bangladesh, amending the RPF Act to give some police powers to the Railway Protection Force. While federalism is indeed a fundamental pillar of the Constitution, it shouldn’t be misused for scoring political points. The framers of the Constitution envisaged the Centre and the states as two co-dependent wheels of the nation. If they are to constantly move in opposite directions, governance paralysis rather than federalism is the most likely outcome.
Under the constitutional scheme of things, states have certain legislative prerogatives as enumerated in the state list. In addition, they also have a say on subjects in the concurrent list. But given 21st century realities such as global terrorism, treating law and order as an exclusive state subject is imprudent. Faced with well-networked international jihadi groups, a credible national security policy demands a coordinated mechanism wherein the states and the Centre work in tandem. Similarly, corruption is a malaise affecting the administrative structure from top to bottom. If a Lokpal is rightly demanded at the Centre, could the fight against graft be effective without Lokayuktas in the states?
The current state of affairs partly stems from an underlying lack of trust in the UPA leadership. Wracked by a series of scams implicating top government officials as well as by skyrocketing prices, the central government appears ineffectual and infirm. But the states too stand guilty of failing to see the big picture. Their intransigence on positive policies such as GST and FDI in retail – which can boost revenue collection, increase investments and cut prices – is cynical. Surely if the Centre isn’t allowed to do its job, then states will fail as well.
In this respect the BJP’s obstructionist role stands out, as it’s a national party. That hasn’t stopped it from using its state governments to stoke the federalism fire, in order to stonewall policies it would have supported if it was in power. But it must realise that if it were to form the next government at the Centre, the same problem would boomerang on it as states would refuse to cooperate with the Centre, making it difficult to govern effectively.
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2012/02/24&PageLabel=22&EntityId=Ar02204&ViewMode=HTML
