Much has in fact been initiated over the past decade. But the rhetoric of change has been much louder than the reality of change. The energy sector is not exceptional. The same can probably be said for almost every area of activity in which the government has a dominant say.

Our economy has moved onto a higher trajectory; our business elite are the toast of Davos and New York, and the Sensex is hitting record levels. These are not insubstantive developments. However, they do not disguise the continuing reality of endemic poverty, Naxalism, social injustice, slipshod governance and abysmal infrastructure.

Conventional wisdom tells us that the price of democracy is incrementalism. We must not expect radical change. The gap between the rhetoric of ten years back and the reality of today in the energy sector exists not because the decision-makers do not know what to do. They know it better than any one else. The gap exists because they believe it cannot be bridged without committing political harakiri. They believe that the electorate would punish them if they raised the price of diesel and gasoline even though by not doing so they know they will bankrupt their Navratna companies. They believe that there would be a dharna if the subsidies on LPG were reduced even though they know that the underprivileged do not benefit from these subsidies. In short, conventional wisdom has it that the voter is a gullible hedonist who cannot see beyond his immediate needs.

The metaphor of Dhoni’s last over suggests that this might no longer be the case. It suggests that the voter in the shape of the youthful, vernacular citizen is not so gullible. He sees the consequences of populism. He challenges the notion of incrementalism and wants a leader prepared to innovate and take risks.

... contd.