When CPM, an ally, and BJP, its adversary, opposed the UPA government on price rise and specifically the looming oil price hike towards the end of April 2008, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh uncharacteristically reacted sharply. He told them "not to politicise the misery of the people." By timing his reaction to just after his 45-minute meeting with the CPM he implied that he was fair in chiding both - his ally and his opponent!

The Prime Minister thus assumed a high moral ground to emphasise depoliticisation of a critical economic decision. But has the Prime Minister himself or his mentor, Sonia Gandhi, or the party had ever practised the high morals he now preaches to others? Obviously, Manmohan Singh is becoming forgetful. Otherwise he would never have assumed the high moral ground which will, when the past - that is not-too-distant - is recalled, make him a hypocrite.

See what happened in November 2007. "Directions have come from Sonia Gandhi, the UPA Chairperson, not to raise the prices of petroleum products, and we have to maintain that." This was Murli Deora, Union Petroleum Minister, telling the Lok Sabha on November 21, 2007. Despite the fact that crude prices had doubled in a year and shot past $ 100 per barrel in the global market, the government shamelessly said that it had to obey the mandate of Sonia Gandhi. The Minister added, "I have no hesitation in saying that the UPA Chairperson has directed us to see that petroleum product prices do not increase and we are trying to do that."

That it was a political decision was clear from the fact that the Gujarat elections were just two weeks away and that the chief campaigner of the Congress,who had personally taken on Narendra Modi with her "Maut ka saudagar" remark, had to be projected as having protected the aam aadmi against rise in petro prices. Of course that trick did not work. Despite her demonstrable -actually demonstrated - concern for them, the aam aadmi preferred Modi to her, rejecting even the tempting free colour TV sets offered to them by her party. The politically wise aam aadmi, who had defeated Indira Gandhi and her Emergency in 1977 when he was far less mature than now, perhaps knew that it was not Sonia Gandhi, but Modi and Gujarat elections that had deferred the fuel price hike in November 2007. Yet, the Manmohan government's shameless position was that it had given up the oil price rise on Sonia's fiat.

Go back another 12 months, to November 2006. Again obeying a fiat from Sonia Gandhi, this time to cut the prices, the government, shamelessly, cut - yes cut - oil prices. This is what Sonia Gandhi told the Congress Parliamentary Party on November 28, 2006. "When the international prices of crude oil came down a few weeks ago, I had discussed with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh the possibility of decreasing the prices of some petroleum products to provide relief to the people" - read aam aadmi. She continued, "He assured me he would look into the matter. I am sure this is under active examination." The day after the next, November 30, Murli Deora, again taking her name, told the Lok Sabha that on Sonia's directions the price of petrol had been reduced by Rs 2 and the diesel price by Re 1. The crude prices which were $ 67 per barrel in June 2006 had fallen to $ 57-58 per barrel in October-November 2006. Earlier, in June 2006, the government put up the petrol price by Rs 4 and diesel price by Rs 2 because the crude prices were higher. Seeing the crude prices softening in October, the CPM had demanded in the first week of November that petrol/diesel prices be cut. This was how, on November 6 - just three weeks before Sonia's fiat to cut the prices - the Petroleum Minister, Murli Deora, and his Secretary, M S Srinivasan, rejected the CPM plea: "International prices continue to fluctuate; just two days ago the Indian basket of crude has risen by one dollar; under-recoveries by oil companies are still continuing;we do not want to act on short-term trends in oil prices; futures markets predict a crude price of $ 64 per barrel in January and $ 75 in June; oil prices are likely to rise during winter months." But the moment the fiat came from No 10, Janpath, all this economic logic cited to reject the very same plea of the CPM vanished. The prices were cut. If this is not political, what else is?

So, the Sonia fiat of November 2006 to cut the petro prices and her fiat of November 2007 stopped the rise of petro prices.Where was economics in November 2006 when the oil companies were still under-recovering but were yet forced by Sonia's political fiat to cut prices? If CPM asks for the same cut in prices that Sonia later directed, that would be rejected citing good economics; but when Sonia gives the fiat, the principles of good economics from the CPM would be thrown into the shredder.

A compliant Prime Minister just carried out the amoral political fiat of his mentor in November 2006 to cut prices when cutting prices was undoubtedly bad economics. He complied with yet another fiat in November 2007 not to raise petro prices when not raising the prices with crude topping $ 100 per barrel was doubtless bad economics. The Prime Minister, a World Bank pensioner and known more as an economist, knew how it was rank bad economics to comply with the fiats of his leader and mentor. Yet he bowed to her. His moral sermon today is hypocritical.

If the petro price issue could be politicised within the Congress party, to give credit for no rise or for cut only to one person and nobody else, how then would it not get politicised outside when the prices are raised? But could the petro price issue have been depoliticised at all? Yes, it could have been, and thus. Assume that the government had cut petro prices in November 2006 on the ground that the crude prices had fallen and not garlanded Sonia Gandhi for her directions to cut the prices. It would be seen and accepted as a purely economic, not a political or politicised, decision.

Had the government done that then it could now say that it had to raise the petro prices as the crude prices had gone up. The people would also understand that just as it had cut the prices earlier when crude prices fell, the government had to raise the petro prices now when crude prices have gone up. Allies or opponents would then have no voice or case against the government. But when the government told a lie to garland Sonia Gandhi for no rise or for cut in petro prices in the past, it cannot now seek protection saying that the rise in crude prices is the true cause. If political parties realise how the lies to project Sonia have landed the Manmohan government in a mess, it would serve as a good political lesson and as a good economic model too - namely the people will know that it is low world crude prices that make local petrol/diesel cheap and it is high crude prices that make it costlier locally.

Courtesy: www.newindpress.com, June 16, 2008