If it’s Anna a week later, it will be someone else after that. The BJP should be careful about running the country through ordinances.

It’s arrogance, immaturity or a combination of both, take your pick. The BJP-led government’s approach to policy matters remain grooved in two firm convictions: one, whatever changes they are bringing in, whether through amendments to existing Acts or by way of new Acts, are irreversible; two, they will be in power for eternity, so they can go ahead with their agenda without bothering about any opposition from without and within. Either case reflects a poor understanding of the nature of the political environment they operate in.

The casualness with which BJP leaders talk about summoning a joint session of Parliament to get the government’s ordinances passed is amazing. The smugness, obviously, comes from the comfort of numbers in Lok Sabha - a joint session will help them overcome the lack of numbers in Rajya Sabha. But are numbers all there is to political decision-making? Not really. It can only bring temporary reprieve, not long-term solutions.

To bring context into play, anti-corruption crusader Anna Hazare has decided to lend weight to the country-wide farmers’ agitation against the Land Act ordinance of the ruling government. Ever since the latter decided to amend the Act passed by the UPA II in 2013, undoing whatever it assured farmers in terms of safeguarding their interests against mindless land grab and cheating by way of denial of rehabilitation and other benefits, resentment is brewing in the farming community.

In the just-concluded Delhi election, the Aam Aadmi Party benefitted from it as it wrested all the rural seats from the BJP by making the ordinance its poll plank. By all indications, the agitation will get big with support from most non-BJP political entities. Even the farmers’ wing of the RSS, the mother organization, is not in favour of the drastic changes to the Act that was passed after intense deliberation over two years. Now, even if the BJP-led NDA manages to get its ordinance cleared in a joint session, can it guarantee that the changes it has brought in cannot be reversed by a new government at a later date?

Coming from a government that never stops reminding everyone of the need for a stable policy regime, the approach is confounding - ordinances are a way of forcing your decision through and it reflects the government’s reluctance to engage in parliamentary discussion and debate. But can we have a stable policy regime without a broad political consensus on policy matters? Well, it’s neither advisable nor durable.

The BJP and its friends seem to have developed the habit of treating Parliament as some kind of a joke. When in opposition it supported the new Land Act, replacing that of the 1894 vintage. It suggested amendments to the bill prepared by the UPA, many of which were incorporated in the Act. Once in power, it has done an about turn. What we have now is the Act as it was in 2010, insensitive to the concerns of the farmers and land losers in other categories of the population.

The party appears to have forgotten that the UPA’s Act was necessitated by mini rebellions across the country – from Bhatta Parsaul in Uttar Pradesh to Singur in West Bengal to Jagatsinghpur in Orissa to elsewhere - over land acquisition, not on the private whim of Rahul Gandhi or any other individual. The ‘eminent domain’ process, which allowed the government to acquire private property for public purpose, was subject to rampant abuse.

As the government played both midwife and broker in land deals for real estate and industry players – it acquired land cheap from farmers and sold it at high prices to private actors; and often decided ‘public purpose’ at the bidding of a nexus of politicians, bureaucrats and real estate players – the farmers were at the receiving end. They were duped of their land and ended up big losers without adequate compensation and rehabilitation benefits. The UPA’s Act was a response to the growing public anger on the streets. The weak government had managed to take into confidence most political parties, including the BJP, while passing it.

The present government does not seem respectful to the idea of consensus-building. Its approach is ensuring that land policy remains unstable. But it’s not only about land; the government has passed several ordinances which it wants to ram through. Call it arrogance of numbers or by any other description, the government will have to reap the consequences of its policies. However, more than the party in question, it would be the corporate players and potential investors, genuinely seeking clarity and consistency in policy matters for a stable business environment, who will take the brunt.

If it’s Anna a week from now, it will be someone else after that. The BJP should be careful about running the country through ordinances.