 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. Today we have with us Shekhar Singh, who is from the national campaign for people's right to information. Shekhar, good to have you with us. Good to be here. Of course, currently we have a very high decibel campaign on corruption. Anna's fast has entered I think today, the 10th day. There doesn't seem to be much scope for people in the middle. Those who are critical of the government and the way it has gone about it, those who think the methods Anna is adopting may not be the best way of resolving the issue. Do you think that in this whole process, the bill has sort of got to the background and what has come more is the methods, the process? Well, I think the middle space problem has been in both areas. There's been a problem of middle space in terms of the bill and in terms of the process. But fortunately, I think it's now growing very fast. I remember that we had drafted a bill or comments on the various issues and we had written to the Joint Committee saying, please give us a chance to put it across. And they had written back saying, yes, but it never happened. We then held off for a while and then came up with it. We were a little hesitant because we felt now that there are two established bills and all. We were amazed at how many people said we were looking for a middle space. Now that was for the bill. The same thing is happening as far as the process goes. Though the process options are less clear because there is the sword hanging over our heads that Anna's health and well-being is at stake. So you can't discuss it as dispassionately as you can the bill. But I think that middle space is growing very fast. And to my mind, that is the way forward. In this, it's an interesting issue that the way the government went about it. First, negotiating with them, inviting them in, having a joint committee. Later on turning around and saying Anna is corrupt, putting him in jail. Do you think that the Congress really shot itself in the foot in this? Very much so. There is no doubt. In fact, I am amazed at their incompetence, frankly speaking. One could understand their deviousness. One could understand disagreeing with their ideology or perspective. But I didn't think that they'd be so incompetent. After all, it's a party in power for more than anybody else. But do you think Shaker is also because today the people who are the leading lights of the Congress are all ruthless politicians, basically dependent on how they, you know, the quote-unquote dynasty or how Sonia Gandhi really looks at them. And that sort of sat the inner party democracy in the Congress. They don't really have the feel of the pulse of the people. Well, I'm not so sympathetic in this matter with the dynastic argument because if it was Raul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi who were behind all this, then I would agree with you. Actually, what has happened is that we have a lot of very influential people in the government. Who are professionals, who got in as professionals who have no experience of grassroots politics, who have no experience of movements, who have not been trade union leaders, who have not been parts of movements, who have not been politicians. They look at the world as black and white, you know. This is legal, this is not legal. This is constitutional, this is not causing. Now, that's not how people respond. So, I think there has been a lot of miscalculation. But I'd like to say one other thing. We've been having talks with the various ministers and so on and so forth. You see, it works both ways. Team Anna, as it's called now, very meticulously planned their intervention in April. I know this because we were in discussion with them. And I remember on the 4th of April, we were in discussion at the National Advisory Council. And this issue was raised that Anna is coming this evening and what should be done? What should we say to him? And we said, look, we made so much progress. Why not appeal to him to wait for a little while? See if the NSE is in agreement with what he really wants. And if the government accepts it, if not, then we'll all join you for a protest. But no, the timing was right at that point. Five states were going in for elections. And I can tell you that senior ministers told us in retrospect when we raised the same question, what is this? Which government could afford to have Anna's face on the television every day weakening when you have five elections coming up? But you know, Shekhar, if you really look at it, look at the way the people are reacting. It's a fact that this government has, or at least the Ban Mohan Singh government has seen in public eye to be the most corrupt government we had had, though we have Ban Mohan Singh himself as a person of unimpeachable credibility on that count. The point is that on every issue, the government has been taken kicking and screaming to where it is now, whether it's Raja, whether it is the Commonwealth Games, whether it's still to build up, whether you have the Reliance Camp, which is also going to come in the K Krishnagodavari Basis Camp. And many more. And many more in the pipeline. And the essential issue is Ban Mohan Singh government does not seem to respond. It's only when it is pressed by other bodies, Supreme Court, CAG, whatever it is. Only then it does something. Don't you think that sort of fueling also the anger amongst the people? Absolutely. In fact, it's interesting that it can only be a prime minister who is sure of his personal credibility, who can look the other way for rampant corruption. Because you're safe, nobody point a finger at me. If that person wasn't sure of his own credibility, he'd be constantly looking around to make sure that there's nothing which reflects on him. So this is one part of it. Only difference is that I'm not sure that there hasn't been a lot of corruption in the past. I think what has changed because of the economic status we are in at the moment, liberalization, etc., is that first of all, the figures involved. Magnitudes are the order of that. The nature has changed. You see, earlier it was License Raj or whatever you call it, the nature has changed. But I think scams have been going on for a long time. Two things have changed. One, I would like to think you might or might not agree, that the bringing in of the Right to Information Act has opened up the floodgates. So I feel that part of it is a transitional stage. And to my mind, a positive transitional stage where things are coming out and where the system is being shaken up and has to learn to deal with it. The third point, and I think that's a point that you started with, I certainly think that this has been the basis for the Anna movement. But consider that team Anna has also been very clever where they've been able to channelize this disgust against corruption. In a very clever way, argue, actually it's support for us. Fair enough, but again, whoever takes to the streets is going to do that. And it is also true that while your group is largely seen to be sort of influencing the government through the NSE and so on, then they have quote unquote successfully brought out the people on the roads. Therefore, the credit of building up the pressure of the government is there. See, that's again an unfortunate perception. There are 26 members of our working group out of which two are members of the NSE. They're not barring Aruna, they're not necessarily the leaders of the NCPRI yet. The NSE was formed six years back, the NCPRI was formed in 1996. Number three, I represent an urban middle class, but the real strength of the NCPRI has actually been in the villages of different part, grassroots people. And sometimes we argue the other way around that because they're grassroots people, we don't have the same influence as middle class because I'm sure if we got in 15,000 people from the villages of Rajasthan and Haryana and Punjab, TV would not be half as interesting. And Bollywood figures. Absolutely. So what I'm saying is that actually it's both ways around. We also recognize that this is a 24-7 TV phenomenon. See, people are saying this is unprecedented. Take away nothing from the Anna team, they've been meticulous in their planning. But that very statement that they've been meticulous also shows that much of this is because they're using Twitter, Facebook, 24-7 TV, etc., which was not available earlier. So let us not build in more into this than there is. I would honestly say and if you read the newspaper reports that are coming, for example, this morning I read that in the Ramleela ground, they now have a separate tent which says women only. Because there have been, at least that's what the newspaper says, large amount of complaints about people being molested. Now what does that mean? There's another report which says that they interviewed a large number of students from JNU, from Delhi University, who said we came to see what we're not, we don't support it because we don't think this is going to work. Shekhar, that also brings up the important question that what is the stake of the media in this? Because if you really look at it, you said about past. We had the JP movement, we had this, what was called Total Revolution in these days. We very recently had a very large workers march in the city, which television didn't cover and the only headlines in the papers were, it caused a traffic jam. Now, you know, so therefore obviously the television plays a big role. What is an issue, what is an event and what is not today? It's interesting, I was recently in a media house on this and one of their very senior people said to me, he says you know there were media houses which were going down financially. And once this movement has started, their viewership has gone up, their advertising revenue has gone up. The fact that cricket has really gone in the back burner is one of the reasons. And the problem is that the cricket team is looting so badly that nobody wants to watch it in any case. So what are you going to watch? So this was provided. So that's one. Secondly, you see, it's also this problem that if one channel starts covering, then nobody can be left out because nobody knows it. Suppose people are interested in that and we don't cover it, nobody is going to watch us. So all you need to do today is get one channel on your side and get a commitment that we will cover it 24-7. Everybody has to follow suit. And because they follow suit, it's a self-satisfying prophecy. Because everybody now, at the end of the day, if all channels are showing Anna, then obviously it follows everybody is watching Anna because there's nothing else to watch. But the other part of it is, don't forget the media recently, very recently, was involved in the news for money. It's very much something that they have managed to cover up. Do you think it's also a way for them to get back into public credibility? You talked only about media. Let me bring in the corporate sector here. See the two big elements of the society who are at the moment left out of detailed scrutiny by the Anna movement or the corporate houses in the media. Now, I don't think that there's any conspiracy involved because I'm not a believer in conspiracy theories. But it's interesting that the corporate sector is supporting the movement through huge donations. Openly, I mean, it's on the website. And the media supporting the movement through huge coverage. And the other two, which have been left out. The belief that actually the corporations who have been involved in these huge scams, that they somehow are victims. I have, in the last four months, spoken to seven meetings of CEOs across the country as invited on this issue of corruption. The general feeling that was conveyed was, we don't have an option. See, they have earlier bent the system to their cause. Now, they are threatened by the fact the system is threatening to eat them up. Let's not forget, few of the business houses are today completely part of what's happening. And let's not also forget that you have very influential government figures who today are also business houses. In the fact that you have Sharad Pawar who runs a huge empire in Maharashtra. There is the Karnanidhis. So you really have this fusion of political class and the business class in which some of the business might be out of it, where a lot of them are also inside. It's also interesting that one of the reasons why I accepted this invitation to speak to these seven groups across the country in different sense, was that I felt, okay, this is a good chance to try and get some support. Not financial support because we don't look for that, but let the corporate side. So my main message to them used to be that look at the moment people aren't talking about you. But somebody is somebody going to ask, what was the corporate sector doing? So why don't you people also get together? Say something, come up with some, because if you don't come up with any suggestions, other people will and then you might not like them. My last meeting which was in Delhi, the seventh meeting, I said to them, I spent my life thinking I was a persuasive talker. I said I have spoken to about a thousand CEOs, not a single wiggle out of them, saying let's formulate our own inputs, let's speak, let the fikki get together and say this is guide, this is how we want to, not a single important. There are as much beneficiaries as victims, that's the whole problem. So this is the interesting historical scenario and we hope that some way there will be a step back from the brink and Anna's past will be called up with some concrete assurances for a stronger Lokpal bill. When we come back, we'll discuss the Lokpal bill in its various avatars which are going around and look at the various provisions, which could be problematic, which could have problems or which could have advantages. Thank you. We'll come back to you in a little while.