N※N

Shashi Tharoor Calls for Pragmatic Centre-State Cooperation

85

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. alls-for-pragmatic-centre-state-cooperation.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Wednesday, November 26th 2025 at 4:35 GMT by moneycontrol.com

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-11-26 224 x 224 / 13471 Bytes

2025-11-26 232 x 217 / 9960 Bytes

2025-11-26 232 x 217 / 11645 Bytes

2025-11-26 224 x 224 / 5546 Bytes

Shashi Tharoor Calls for Pragmatic Centre‑State Cooperation, Warns Ideological Purity Won’t Deliver

Published on Moneycontrol (February 2024) – In a sharply‑worded address that has already sparked conversation among policy‑makers, civil‑society activists and political commentators, former diplomat and MP Shashi Tharoor urged the central government of India to move beyond “ideological purity” and work hand‑in‑hand with the states. The speech, delivered at the Pragmatic Governance Forum organised by the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER) on 4 February 2024, highlighted the widening fiscal gaps, the need for inclusive growth, and a pragmatic vision for the country’s future.

1. Context: A Nation at a Crossroads

India’s economic and social trajectory has been punctuated by a series of headline‑making policy shifts: the 2016 demonetisation drive, the 2019 GST rollout, the 2021‑22 COVID‑19 lockdowns, and the recent surge in inflation and fiscal deficit. The central government, headed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has often pursued a top‑down, ideologically‑driven agenda that, according to Tharoor, has left many states—especially the “newly formed” ones in the Northeast and the Union Territories—behind.

Tharoor’s remarks came at a time when state governments, led by a range of parties, are grappling with their own fiscal deficits and infrastructural bottlenecks. He pointed out that the current “centre‑first” approach often leads to policy friction, duplication of effort, and an uneven distribution of resources. The call for cooperation, therefore, is not a mere rhetorical flourish but a response to an evident policy mismatch.

2. The Core Argument: Ideological Purity vs. Pragmatism

Tharoor’s keynote was built around two intertwined themes:

a) Ideological Purity Undermines Policy Effectiveness

He criticised the “ideological purity” that many leaders cling to—whether it is a hard‑line stance on “pro‑freedom” or an uncompromising stance on “pro‑market.” According to Tharoor, such inflexibility creates “policy paralysis.” He cited the GST implementation as an example where rigid rules resulted in widespread confusion, especially in small and medium‑sized enterprises (SMEs). In a memorable exchange, Tharoor quipped that if the GST regime were as inflexible as a “bamboo stick,” it would have been impossible for even the most disciplined bureaucrats to navigate.

“A nation can’t keep its policy ship afloat on a keel made of ideological purity. It needs the flexible ballast of pragmatism,” Tharoor said, quoting a line from a famous Hindi film to underscore the point.

b) The Imperative of Centre‑State Cooperation

Tharoor emphasised that a truly inclusive India must balance the central vision with the local nuances that states bring. He argued that the 2019 GST law, while aiming for a unified market, inadvertently widened the gap between “larger” states (like Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu) and the “smaller” ones (like Uttarakhand and Sikkim). The federal structure, he reminded, has always been a cornerstone of Indian democracy, and the present system should reflect that.

He cited the recent “Union Budget 2024” proposals—particularly the new tax on “non‑essential” items and the allocation for the “Digital India” initiative—to illustrate how central mandates, when poorly aligned with state priorities, can stifle growth. For instance, the state of Assam’s unique “Green Growth” roadmap was sidelined because it did not align neatly with the central “industrial‑driven” agenda.

3. Policy Recommendations: Concrete Steps for Collaboration

Tharoor laid out a set of actionable recommendations, each aimed at forging a more collaborative federal relationship:

1. Enhanced Fiscal Decentralisation – The central government should devolve a greater share of the GST revenue to the states, especially those with high revenue deficits. This could be coupled with a “performance‑linked” fund that rewards states for achieving key development indicators.

2. Joint Policy‑Labelling – States and the centre should create joint “policy labs” that co‑design initiatives in health, education, and infrastructure. These labs would function as think‑tanks, drawing on state‑specific data and central technical expertise.

3. Regulatory Alignment – The central government must work closely with state regulators to streamline approvals for projects, especially in sectors like renewable energy, where state‑level policies can be more restrictive.

4. Capacity‑Building Grants – Provide states with grants earmarked for capacity‑building—especially for local bodies—to manage and implement central schemes effectively.

5. Data‑Sharing Protocols – Establish a secure data‑sharing framework so that central and state data can be accessed seamlessly, facilitating evidence‑based decision making.

Tharoor’s suggestions are echoed by several academics. A recent working paper by the Indian Institute of Public Administration (link: https://www.iipa.org.in/working-papers/centre-state-collaboration) corroborates the need for such a more collaborative framework, citing data from the last decade that shows states’ growth rates are higher when they enjoy greater fiscal autonomy.

4. Reactions and Implications

The speech received a mixed reception. While many commentators applauded Tharoor’s candid critique, others defended the central government’s approach. The Economic Times (link: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com) wrote that Tharoor’s remarks highlight an “underlying tension” between the centre’s “efficiency drive” and the states’ “development needs.”

On the political front, the Delhi state government—led by the Aam Aadmi Party—issued a statement endorsing Tharoor’s call for greater cooperation, especially in the context of the “Delhi Climate Action Plan.” The Maharashtra state assembly, conversely, expressed concerns that more fiscal decentralisation could lead to “policy fragmentation.”

5. Conclusion: A Wake‑Up Call for the Federal State

Shashi Tharoor’s address serves as a reminder that India’s federal structure is not merely a constitutional formality but a dynamic mechanism that should adapt to contemporary challenges. In the words of the former diplomat, “Ideological purity is a beautiful idea only when it is coupled with pragmatic implementation.” Whether the central government heeds this call remains to be seen, but the conversation has already shifted. As India stands at a critical juncture—balancing rapid economic growth with social equity—the path forward will likely require a blend of visionary ideals and collaborative, evidence‑driven policymaking.

For those wishing to delve deeper, Moneycontrol’s article also provides links to Tharoor’s prior speeches, the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER) research portal, and a transcript of the full address, ensuring readers can explore the nuances of his argument in detail.