Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh.
Credit: PTI File Photo
New Delhi: Manmohan Singh acted like Private Secretary to Sonia Gandhi when he was Prime Minister and was not even willing to take credit for positive work done by his own government, a new book on Prime Minister’s Office by a JNU professor has claimed.
At the same time, the book PMO: Prime Minister’s Office Through the Years by Professor Himanshu Roy is effusive in its praise of Narendra Modi’s PMO, claiming it is the “most digitalised, responsive and transparent” office in comparison to those of his predecessors.
While seeking to draw the history of the Prime Minister’s Secretariat changing its character and name to Prime Minister’s Office, the book is critical of the country’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru for bringing in a prime ministerial form of government in place of cabinet form of government.
Roy, a Professor at the Centre for Political Studies at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, claims in his book that the prominence of PMO over Cabinet Secretariat had its origin during Nehru’s tenure and was institutionalised when Lal Bahadur Shastri was at the helm.
He goes on to claim that Sardar Vallabhai Patel resisted Nehru’s attempt to go solo but after his passing away, the Prime Minister had his way. “The decline in the cabinet’s functioning had become visible during Nehru’s time itself, especially after the death of Patel in December 1950, when he let his ministers bypass the procedures of the Cabinet with his consent,” he wrote.
On Singh, the book claimed that the Prime Minister’s “loyalty” to the Gandhis had a “catastrophic impact” on the government’s functioning and there was a “wilful” absence of Ministers from Cabinet meetings.
“The political standing of the PM was reflected in the PMO. He (Singh) acted as PS to Sonia Gandhi while running the administration…The Congress ministers were accountable to Sonia Gandhi. The leaders of coalition parties and their ministers were more respectful to her. The PM was respected only for his integrity and knowledge,” he wrote.
The book also claims Singh was not even willing to take credit for his “positive work” of his government and the family had learnt their lesson from Narasimha Rao’s tenure, who had run the government “without any interference” from them.
“This time the family intended to have their cake and eat it too. The idea was to seize the space of the Opposition by projecting Rahul Gandhi as the Leader of the Opposition, should the citizens feel dissatisfied with the government,” he wrote.
“And credit was of course duly taken for any development work. The persona of the PM was also used for their benefit. He was just there on behalf of the family because Sonia Gandhi could not become the PM and Rahul Gandhi was not yet ready for the job, or rather he had miscalculated his ability,” Roy added.
On Modi, the book said he has expedited and expanded the use of technology for governance to the hilt in terms of “actuating transparency, accountability, effectiveness and responsiveness” in the functioning of ministries and the administration.
He claimed the “noticeable” feature of Modi’s PMO is to select “honest and efficient” civil servants and place them in key positions.
“...the allegations surrounding Modi are bereft of any knowledge of the historical trajectory of the PMO and the office of the PM, which had already acquired a prime ministerial form during Nehru’s time…and which is the global trend most visible in the canadian polity, akin to India.