'Is The Government Serious About Reforms?'

Did you and the finance secretary have to go because the government wanted a new team to present a new-look budget?
That's possible, a new team does help look at old problems in a new angle. It's the government's prerogative.
But won't this impact the budget exercise and reforms?
It may not. But if you study the average tenure of senior bureaucrats in key ministries over the past five years—power, petroleum, coal—it will come to about seven-eight months for each. Which begs the question: is the government serious about reforms?Did you have an eventful tenure?
When I was power secretary, we piloted the work on regulatory commissions and the transmission bill. I was shunted out of here because the minister didn't like my face. Then when I was expenditure secretary, we started the process of signing MoUs with states. In economic affairs, I piloted the Fiscal Responsibility Bill, but there is so much uproar.
What does the Bill focus on?
To have a medium-term fiscal plan and an independent group to check whether the government is sticking to it, and a clear-cut plan to reduce fiscal deficit. Transparency is important. The budget process is not transparent which might have serious long-term implications. My view is that every rupee spent should create some reform somewhere.
So what's the future of reforms?
We should first identify the genuine political reforms. Reforms are needed most in putting in place an institutional framework for change. In power, more MWs are meaningless unless the boards can sell them. This conceptual change in our systems will take another three years.