___________

It is my impression that the opposition parties in Orissa over the years have focused more on finding fault with Government schemes and actions and often agitated to stop them completely. Although opposition should find fault with government actions, their approach of doing it indiscriminately, focusing on stopping the action altogether and only doing that, is a flawed approach and it has not only hampered the development of Orissa but has hampered the opposition parties themselves, especially when they are pitted against Naveen Patniak’s government.

Their appraoch would work if the government is seen by people to be corrupt and if other developments were not happening. However, that is not the case with Naveen Patnaik’s government. Naveen has distanced himself from corruption taints by taking swift action in removing his ministers and officers accused of corruption. So he and his government are not seen by the people as a corrupt government. Also there is no visible accumulation of wealth by Naveen Patnaik and neither does he have relatives dependent on him or relatives that he is trying to groom. So most people see that he does not have a reason to be corrupt. (Contesting in elections does require money. But most people  often do not question where that money comes from. Moreover, every party needs that money and spends that money. ) On the other hand they do see progress happening around, be it NREGS, or gram-sadaks or establishment of IIT. They also see Naveen Patnaik frequently dueling with the central government on getting more resources for Orisssa.

The opposition’s approach of fighting such a government by opposiing development programs indisciminately, and demanding that they be stopped, does not help them – may actually harm them, and also harms Orissa. It may harm them because because many people see them has blocking Orissa’s progress.

The opposition party should change their strategy and beat Naveen at his own game.

They should change their premise that Naveen is doing wrong things that need to be stopped to:

• In addition to what Naveen is doing, he must do XYZ to protect interests of UVW people,
• Naveen is not doing enough good things, and
• Naveen is missing opportunities.

They should take the development mantra down to towns districts and blocks.

They should agitate and ask the state government to do XYZ in UVW district. They should compare regions/towns/districts/blocks across Orissa and agitate that XYZ region/town/district/block does not have UVW or is being discriminated against PQR. Now when they succeed in convincing or forcing the government to take action many people will give them the credit; the same way Naveen Patnaik’s government gets credit for getting IIT and NISER to Orissa even though they were central government decisions and PM Manmohan Snigh paid personal attention to this. Alternatively, if the state government does not give in to their demand they can make that their election plank.

Let us take some specific examples.

People in Balasore have been demanding a medical college. A smart opposition could have made a big issue out of it. If it had succeeded after some agitation then the people would have remembered that when casting their vote.

Similarly, the Rourkela area, the second largest metropolitan area of Orissa, does not have a general university. In fact, I would go out on a limb and say that it is the largest metropolitan area in the country to not have a general university where one can puruse graduate (Masters and PhD) degrees in fields like Economics, Psychology, Physics, Business, etc. A smart opposition party could have taken advantage of that and created a movement in Rourkela for that and would have benefited by that. 

A smart opposition should have taken up the issue of the Central University of Orissa in Koraput starting in Bhubaneswar instead of in Koraput.

These are some glaring examples. Every region, every block, every district, every town needs development related things that the state government may have neglected. A smart opposition advocating those needs would get the attention of people there.

Such a strategy is a win-win and no-loss strategy. No one locally will oppose the demand of a medical college or a university. Thus there is no loss. It is a win-win because if they succeed in getting XYZ they can claim that their efforts led to getting XYZ and if they don’t they can blame the state government for neglecting the region/district/town/block and promise that if they come to power they would make XYZ  happen.

Instead, Orissa’s opposition often follows a very risky strategy which often goes against them. What they do is they oppose the establishment of UVW, say because it displaces X number of families. While some of those families (Y < X) may not want to be displaced many others are happy with the compensation package. But a large number of people who live nearby and are not displaced would really like UVW established. In agitating againts the establishment of UVW the opposition parties usually create a lot of drama, get a lot of lefties – many from outside state – involved, sometime pursue violence, many times block roads (causing a lot trouble to the locals) and get a lot of press.  By reading the press, which usually jumps on reporting events (bandhs, violence, road closure, etc.), they wrongly assume that they are getting a lot of popularity.

But actually while they do get the support of the Y families who do not want to displaced, they have lost support of X-Y families who want to move and the neighboring people who think they would have been benefitted by the project. So the opposition parties, by  doing this, basically harm themesleves as well as Orissa.

If they were smarter they would be more discriminating in their  targets and in their approach. Ofcourse, if the govt is violating laws (including displacement laws) they should oppose that; If the compensation is not fair they should pursue getting higher compensation; etc. Such a constructive approach would not only get them the votes of X (all of whom would get a better deal because of the opposition) but also of many people locally and across the state who would be impressed by the constructive approach.

(The opposition parties will say that they do indeed point out laws that are broken and even go to court. That is true. They do. But often they make many frivolous cases which take time but ultiamtely goes against the opposition. All that results is the delay of the project, lost opportunity, and a lot of people annoyed at the opposition for their negative impact.) 

So I will advise the opposition to at least pursue the three examples I mentioned above (Medical College in Balasore, University in Rourkela and starting of Central University of Orissa in Koraput), change their game plan in regards to Vedanta University, Posco, and Tata’s Kalinganagar project, and in general pursue the alternate strategy suggested above. Let me now be more specific on some of these.

• On Vedanta University, the opposition should create a database of all the people that are being displaced and make sure the promises made to them are kept. The opposition can make sure all other promises are being kept such as regarding to where water comes from, how the environment is not harmed, etc.
• On POSCO, they can again make sure that the promises made to the displaced people are kept. They can push for better compensation. They can team up with the state government in pushing the center for better lease rates. etc.