This shows the deterioration of the status of NDC over the years and more so in recent times The NDC, which was set-up on August 6, 1952, had a special role in the federal policy. In the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s words it was setup with three objectives. The first was to strengthen and mobilize the efforts and resources of the country in support of the Plans. The second was to promote common economic policies in all vital spheres and the third to ensure the balanced and rapid development of all parts of the country. Its functions included review of the working of the national plan from time to time, looking at important questions of social and economic policies affecting the national development and recommend measures for the achievement of the aims and targets set out in the National Plan.

The NDC is the apex decision -making body and Nehru stressed all the time that NDC had to bear intimate responsibility for the Plans in all its phases. Chief Ministers who shouldered heavy responsibility in their States naturally had to think of their States. But, at the same time, as chief ministers they also had to think of the country as a whole. All Union Ministers, Chief Ministers of all the States and Administrators of Union Territories and Members of the Planning Commission, Ministers of State with independent charge are also invited to the deliberations of the Council.

But what has happened to the NDC over the years? Looking back, it is clear that the character and importance of the NDC had changed over the years although the members have not. In the sixties and seventies, the country had mostly Congress chief ministers and there was cohesion in the NDC by and large. However in the eighties when the regionalism started raising its head, the cohesion was the first causality. Old timers recall that when the Andhra Pradesh chief minister N.T. Ramarao wanted to make negative speech in the NDC, he was not allowed and he walked out in a huff. The news was his walk out and not what was deliberated in the NDC. Slowly and gradually the regional leaders have been increasing in number that today there are several discordant voices in the NDC from the North, East, South and the West. Non-Congress chief ministers are also growing in number with the result the NDC meetings have become more of showing off the authority of the regional satraps and taking on the centre rather than fruitful interactions. The NDC gets scant respect from the non-Congress chief ministers that some of them like Mayawati and Jayalalithaa do not even bother to attend the meetings. Even a Congress chief minister like Omen Chandy decided to stay away from NDC citing Onam as his excuse. Either they send their speeches or depute someone else on behalf of their governments. Leaders like Narendra Modi make use of this forum to vent their frustrations against the “step motherly treatment“ meted out to their respective states.

In such a situation, do the NDC Meetings have any meaning? Are they still relevant? While the meetings gave an opportunity for chief ministers from all over the country to have a first hand interaction, on various developmental issues and economic policies do they attempt to learn from one another?

First of all, the tolerance level between the centre and state is on the decrease and neither the centre nor the all powerful regional satraps are willing to listen to the other with the result there is no meeting ground. Old timers point out that Nehru was a man with wisdom and was willing to listen to the dissent. He had respect even for those who were against the views held by him. That kind of tolerance is not there any more because it is the vote bank politics, which has taken control today.

Secondly, the spirit of federalism is on the wane because the states want to be strong while the centre also wants to be strong and in this there is a tug of war.

Thirdly, the coalition era has come to stay both at the centre and the state with the result the agenda of each party is different and power is the only cementing factor that binds them together.

Fourthly, the dual power experiment by the Congress is also another reason for the weakening of this system as power lies elsewhere and responsibility lies somewhere. In a government where the Congress ministers themselves speak in different voices how could one expect the NDC consisting of various hues be cohesive?

Fifthly, globalisation and liberalisation has changed the values with the result the economic policies have undergone a tremendous change in the past two decades. Gone are the days of the mixed economy and importance to the public sector undertakings, which is one of the areas the NDC looks into. In short, there is a complete weakening for bodies like the NDC or the Inter state council, which do not meet as often as it should. While NDC is going through the motions of looking at various things including the 12th Five Year Plan there is no doubt it is the same as its political significance is waning gradually. One reason could be that there are other bodies, which have taken over. For instance it is the NAC chaired by Sonia Gandhi, which decides on many important issues like food security, communal harmony and other such issues taking over the policy making initiative from the government. The NAC had been successful in the past seven years by launching various flagship programmes like the NREGA, Right to Information and other important issues. Still the NDC could assert itself if it wants to, as the members of the NDC are most powerful chief ministers. The question is will it? (IPA Service)