It wasn't 'Jayanthi tax'; it was Sonia-Rahul tax that India paid the price for

The resignation of Jayanthi Natarajan from the Congress party today (30 January) in protest against the shabby treatment meted out to her by Rahul Gandhi when she was Minister for Environment and Forests in Manmohan Singh’s government is shocking not for its political impact, but for the disclosures she made about the nature of dynastic power during UPA rule. It does her no credit for remaining a family loyalist when her duty should have been to uphold national interests and her accountability should have been to the Council of Ministers headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. [caption id=“attachment_2072455” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Jayanthi Natarajan. AFP[/caption] In her letter to Sonia Gandhi, written in November 2014 but leaked to the media two days ago, Natarajan makes damning accusations that show that she was accountable more to the dynasty than anyone else. Hence her hurt at being cast away like a worn out tube of toothpaste (to use PG Wodehouse’s evocative phrase) once they no longer needed her. In her letter, she makes repeated references not to the government’s environment protection laws, but to the dynasty’s pressures on the subject. With reference to pressures from Sonia Gandhi on certain projects, she writes: “As Chairperson NAC (National Advisory Council), you have written several letters to me regarding projects in the Environment Ministry, and protection of tribal rights, and I have always kept you briefed that due care was being taken by me to protect the environment.” Question: why did a party head need frequent briefing on matters that were confidential to government? About Rahul Gandhi’s interference when he was nothing more than an MP of the party, she writes: “I received specific requests (which used to be directives for us) from Shri Rahul Gandhi and his office forwarding environmental concerns in some important areas and I took care to honour those “requests.” Shri Rahul Gandhi went in person to Niyamgiri Hills in Odisha, and publicly declared to the Dongria Kondh tribals that he would be their “sipahi” and would not allow their interests to suffer at the hands of mining giant Vedanta. His views in the matter were conveyed to me by his office, and I took great care to ensure that the interests of the tribals were protected and rejected environmental clearance to Vendanta despite tremendous pressure from my colleagues in cabinet, and huge criticism from industry for what was described as “stalling” a Rs. 30,000 crore investment from Vedanta.” (Italics mine). Why did Natarajan have to honour “requests” from Rahul Gandhi, whose wishes were like “directives” to her? Note the following points. Jayanthi Natarajan kept Sonia informed about projects she was interested in, and Rahul Gandhi’s views were given preference over the views of her cabinet colleagues. She lost her job in December 2013 not because she was not listening to Sonia and Rahul, but because Rahul wanted to make a grand announcement at a pre-election speech at industry lobby Ficci that the government would speed up environmental clearances. That’s why Natarajan was fired by Manmohan Singh: she was to be blamed for the delays, not Sonia and Rahul, who were the actual behind-the-scenes players in project clearance delays. During the election campaign, Narendra Modi gleefully referred to the “Jayanthi tax” that was holding up development projects. Modi hinted that there may be other considerations in these delays, and hence his reference to the “Jayanthi tax.” At today’s press conference announcing her exit from the Congress, Jayanthi refused to attack Modi for this mockery, and pointed out that when her own party was vilifying her, she could not blame Modi for taking advantage of it. But as her letter’s references to Sonia’s and Rahul’s roles in environmental issues show, we can say one thing for sure: there may have been no Jayanthi tax; but there certainly was a Sonia-Rahul tax. That tax was paid by the country.