Antony, a 37-year-old bachelor, known to lead a spartan life, came into politics through the pre-Sanjay Youth Congress. Essentially an organization man, he became the PCC's general secretary, and later its president. He did not contest the Assembly elections in March last year. Yet a few months later the chief ministership was thrust on him: he was the party's unanimous choice when its leader, K. Karunakaran, was obliged to step down following the sensational disclosures relating to the death by torture of Rajan, an engineering student, during the Emergency.
The Rajan case inevitably became the main election issue at Kazhakkootam, from where Antony entered the Assembly in a by-election: The Opposition, especially the Janata Party, wanted the voters to give a verdict on the Emergency. What the voters gave was a verdict on Antony.
The Congress split and the demand by two minor partners, the NDP and the PSP, for representation in the cabinet have set in motion internal pressures which may endanger the coalition in course of time. Karunakaran, who heads the Indira faction, claims the support of 20 out of the 38 Congress MLAs. So far, however, only about half that number have come out openly on his side. At the moment, his modest objective is to win over at least 18 MLAs so that he can establish his party as the main opposition in the Assembly, a position now occupied by the CPM. The Marxist objective is to bring about a major realignment of political forces to put an end to the UF'S unbroken rule of more than seven years, which is a record in Kerala's post-independence history.
Antony is unwilling to concede the NDP-PSP claims for ministerial positions because they may upset the delicate internal balance that accounts for the UF Government's survival. In an interview with India Today in Trivandrum he declined to answer questions on the coalition's future. But he was emphatic that the exit of the former prime minister's followers will in no way weaken the Congress base in the state. He answered questions on his Government's relationship with the Centre and its efforts to accelerate the state's economic development.
Here are some of the excerpts:
Q. What is the impact of the Congress split on Kerala? It is now clear that Congressmen will not go en bloc to one group or the other. A. The division is only marginal. Most Congressmen of Kerala remain in the organization. Some may go away, but many more will come in. Ultimately there will be no erosion in the Congress strength.
Q. From where do you expect people to come in?
A. The Congress base is expanding.
Q. You mean to say younger elements are coining in?
A. Also working class and peasants. Really speaking, the Emergency excesses were a cross that the Congress was bearing. Now that it is no longer there, we have the opportunity to work with greater vitality.
Q. That may be the position in Kerala. What is the position at the national level?
A. Well, the Congress has hard times ahead, but it will emerge stronger.
Q. Would you say Indira Gandhi was a liability and the Congress is now rid of it?
A. I would not use those words. In fact, I don't believe in the use of such expressions. In Kerala the Congress base is intact.
Q. What is the impact of the split on the relations between the Congress and other parties such as the CPI?
A. There is no danger to the coalition government in Kerala.
Q. There is a suggestion that in view of the split the Congress share in the ministry should be reduced. The NDP and the PSP have asked for representation...
A. I don't want to go into all that.
Q. Following the invalidation of the election of some coalition leaders, doubts have been cast on the conduct of the last general elections in the state. What is your reaction to it?
A. It was afterwards that I fought the Kazhakkootam by-election. It was held in a free atmosphere. Even the Election Commission's observers expressed happiness over it. Not one vehicle was used. After the by-election, no one even filed an election petition.
Q. The Rajan case created a lot of sensation.
A. It was after this that I contested from Kazhakkootam.
Q. Have the disclosures in the Rajan case led to any rethinking in the Government on the methods employed by the police.
A. The question is not one of police methods. Everything depends on the way the administrative leadership uses the police.
Q. The Rajan case relates to a recent event that has come to light. Such things have happened in the state even earlier. Has the Government given thought to ways and means of avoiding such things?
A. We should try to develop a new approach in police personnel right from the training period. It is no use blaming the police alone. What matters is how the police is used.
Q. In a recent statement you said there was an ideological basis for the Congress split. What are the ideological differences between the two Congresses?
A. The differences relate to basic approach. We admit that there were excesses during the Emergency. We want to correct them. This is the position taken by the Congress. We want that in future it should not be possible for anyone to declare Emergency except in conditions of war. There should be no such thing as an internal Emergency. In other words, we are admitting our mistakes, whereas they (Indira Gandhi and her supporters) are not prepared to do so.
Q. There is no ideological difference apart from this, is there?
A. This is a basic issue. It has a democratic content. Democratic solutions must be found for any problems that may arise in a democracy. If extra-constitutional solutions are attempted, it will destroy democracy. This is the lesson experience has taught us.
Q. What about the collective leadership formula?
A. That is a part of democratic functioning.
Q. How is your relationship with the present Government at the Centre?
A. Government-to-Government relations are good. However, there are differences over some issues. That is a part of democratic politics.
Q. You are satisfied with the assistance the Centre is giving to Kerala?
A. There are, as I said, differences on some issues. The two Governments have decided to disagree on such issues.
Q. What are the major areas of difference?
A. There are several pending issues. For instance, we want to be compensated for the loss resulting from changes in the central sales tax. On planning, too, there are differences. In fact, we have not been able to digest this rolling plan concept. It involves a matter that was settled by Parliament. Subsequently, changes were made in a dramatic manner without even calling a meeting of the National Development Council (NDC). It was wrong to make a unilateral shift in policy.
Q. No differences on the quantum of aid for the state plan?
A. We are soon going to have discussions on it. With all the differences, our relationship at governmental level is very smooth. The differences relate to the approach on certain issues. We feel that any shift in planning, even a minor one, should be decided only after taking the states into confidence.
Q. NDC means chief ministers. Doesn't failure to consult NDC mean the states are not being given sufficient weightage?
A. I feel it is a wrong thing to do. I have written to the Prime Minister saying it was a wrong step.
Q. Any reply from him?
A. He has offered to call a meeting of the NDC.
Q. What is your position on the demand for greater autonomy for the states?
A. The states must have more financial resources. This means there must be greater devolution of the finances. At the same time, we do not favour anything that will weaken the Centre. We want a strong Centre. We want the states also to be strong. The basis of the strength of the states is financial stability. Today the states are financially weak. Activities necessitating heavy financial commitments, such as education, health, social welfare, are in the state sector. The committed expenditure on these keeps going up. Yet the states' resources are limited.
Q. Will not the Centre's strength decline to the extent tlie states strength increases?
A. What I want is a change in the principles of devolution of finances.
Q. Since Kerala society is deeply divided politically, developmental efforts seem to suffer. Have you any plans to evolve a bipartisan approach to problems of development?
A. Politics is a part of the social reality. How can it be avoided? Actually politics revolves round economic development.
Q. What is the progress in small industries which are important for employment generation?
A. We are developing them. Our traditional industries, such as coir, cashew, beedi and handloom, had been shattered. We are trying to stabilize them. We have achieved partial success in this effort. We are also encouraging khadi and village industries. I can't say employment has increased. But we have ended the stagnation.
Q. Supply of raw materials and marketing are the major problems faced by small industries. Have you been able to tackle them?
A. In addition, we have the problem of financial resources.
Q. Aren't banks helping?
A. To some extent, yes. But not enough. A hopeful trend that has developed after the Second World War is overseas employment. It has helped Kerala's economy. We want to encourage it. For the next few years there is a tremendous potential for employment of our people abroad, especially in the Gulf countries. If we build up an industrial base by mobilizing a part of the remittances from abroad - about Rs 300 crore a year - we should be able to absorb these people in gainful employment when they come back home.
Q. Overseas employment markets have been shifting. When the earlier markets closed, people were lucky to find new markets elsewhere. But can this continue for ever?
A. Expansion is going on all the time. Maybe it will be the Moon where opportunities come up tomorrow. We do not see the world in compartments. Wherever there is scope, our people will go.
