So what should be the key ingredients of a national concordance? First and foremost, foreign policy and defence. For long, non-alignment was the bedrock of our foreign policy. In a vastly different world, strategic partnership with other major developed countries, particularly the United States, is an inescapable reality. The nuclear deal should have been a unifying ingredient considering its multiple advantages, and the approval process in the US government is clearly not to be blamed for the divisiveness introduced in what was hitherto an area of continuity.

Second, depoliticising public delivery systems. No monitoring of outcomes or increased public investment, particularly in rural areas through the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme or Bharat Nirman, can be meaningful if the delivery system remains clogged with incessant political interference. Can there be consensus among parties on some accepted ‘rules of the game’, which would partially free public-delivery systems from discretionary political decision-making?

Third, public expenditure. Some consensus on areas where public expenditure would be justified. Evaluation of expenditure outcomes, more importantly the efficacy of subsidies, and the impact on intended beneficiaries is inescapable.

Fourth, the balance between development initiatives and their consequences for resettlement and rehabilitation. While some displacement and transitional difficulties may be inevitable, what would be the appropriate benchmarks for assessing the adequacy of compensation and apportioning of benefits?

Fifth, energy security not only in exploring alternative energy forms, economising its usage, concerted action on both demand and supply but pricing of energy among different users and the reasonableness of subsidised energy activity need rational review.

... contd.