This is a question that foxes us almost everyday. When we cannot find answers we blame the process, the political party, the candidate and sometimes the electorate. But time and again the people of India have given political pundits a brilliant display of their grasp of politics while casting their vote. Yet we ponder as to why good people never get elected. Part of the problem lies in the mistaken belief that well intentioned people make good leaders. Secondly, we make the erroneous assumption that politics is driven, or should be driven by ethics alone. Thirdly, everybody has a different definition of ‘good’. Fourthly, in this debate, the practical aspect of politics tends to be ignored and at times even questioned as undesirable.
In Goa, of the many candidates in the fray, are two dedicated and thoroughbred activists – Matanhy Saldanha and Christopher Fonseca. They bear the stamp of consistency. Christopher Fonseca has been a trade union leader all his life. His commitment to the issues and problems faced by labour is unquestionable. Similarly, Matanhy Saldanha has been an activist all his life. He fought for the ramponkars, against the Konkan Railway and Meta Strips and now, protection of houses of fishermen is his main plank. Like Fonseca, Saldanha has an unblemished record as an activist. The fact is, Fonseca never got elected and Saldahna made it to the Assembly only once, which seemed more like an aberration in his innings in public life.
On the other hand look at Churchill Alemao. He survived serious charges of smuggling and resurrected himself with the Konkan Railway agitation. He led the UGDP with three MLAs in the Assembly elections, defeated Eduardo Faleiro, returned to the Congress, resigned to form the Save Goa Front which he merged with the Congress to save the Digambar Kamat government and is now blowing hot and cold because his daughter did not get the Congress ticket for South Goa. His record on fighting issues is dismal and yet he is a force to reckon with in the political arena while Fonseca and Saldanha struggle to get past the post.
Politics is the art in doing what is possible, not what is correct. It is the art of gauging the interest of the people and then going with the flow even if it means compromising on one’s personal ethics. Voters are not fools. They understand the personal cost of being public life. Hence they do not expect their leaders to be paragons of virtue and grant them the liberty of making a quick buck on the side. What they want is that their voice be heard, not your own. If the voters are fickle, the politicians will follow suit. Only those with a thick skin or those who have buried their conscience deep enough can survive in this game. Take the classic example of the Cidade de Goa amendment. Activists and public-spirited people, whose numbers are not large enough to make a political difference, were vociferous in their protest against the amendment. In contrast, a large number of people living along the coast turned logic on its head by using the amendment to demand special concessions for houses build in violation of CRZ rules. Politicians went with the larger group. Saldanha did not go with the fishermen because they were the larger group, but because the activist in him refused to abandon them.
Why is it so difficult for well-intentioned men or women to convert good will into votes? In this respect it would be wise to examine the rise and fall of Goa Bachao Abhiyan. It started as a group of informed and committed people, with no political experience. The cause was well defined and the GBA mustered the support of the people. Two years later, the GBA is in tatters, a shadow of itself and a far cry from those heady days when its leaders could fill Azad Maidan or Lohia Chowk. Now contrast this with how Digambar Kamat pushed through a Regional Plan, scrapped SEZs, reshuffled his cabinet, took hold of the key finance portfolio, contained the Alemao threat (almost), took the tough decision to banish floating casinos from the Mandovi and yet retained his government for nearly two years. The lesson to be learnt is: to be a politician one must possess the art of managing interests, not ethics. Perhaps, this election will show us if Saldanha and Fonseca have made the jump from activist to politician.
