Finally, after much uncertainty, we have a government in place in our state. The majority may not be a comfortable one, but it is very likely that governance will continue under an entirely untested and new political entity, at least for some time. What however it certainly means is that our city’s civic body, namely the Greater Chennai Corporation, as also those in other cities in our state, will now have to function under much uncertainty. History has shown us that they work best only when the same party is in power in the state as well as in the council. What then is going to happen to the Greater Chennai Corporation (GCC) and therefore our city’s administration?
The GCC has a history that goes back to 1688. Even within the first decade of its functioning, it was made painfully aware that it was in its best interests to align itself with the powers at Fort Saint George. Thus, when the first mayor, Nathaniel Higginson fell out with the governor Elihu Yale, funding for the corporation was stopped. Matters improved only when Higginson became the governor himself. History has since repeated itself. In the 1950s, when the DMK captured the city’s corporation it found itself at loggerheads with the Congress that was in power in this state. But at that time the mayor’s post was essentially apolitical, and also given that the commissioner’s post had a lot more power to it than at present, the corporation could still function. In 1967 both state and city aligned and continued till 1973 when the muster roll scandal led to the suspension of the corporation council which was not revoked till 1996.
In recent times, elections to the corporation and particularly that of the mayor’s post have been fought only from political standpoints. The city’s voting population has also been very canny about this and has made sure that when a certain party swept to power in the assembly, the same party was voted to the corporation as well, thereby ensuring that its functioning was smooth. This however has had its own disadvantages. The corporation has steadily undermined its role in relation to the city, and most of its major decisions have been taken out of its hands. Even as routine a matter as the renaming of a road is dependent on chief ministerial approval. The mayor has essentially functioned as an extension of the political party in power.
On the odd occasion, when there were opposing parties in power respectively at the state and in the city, much chaos and conflict ensued. The city civic body, dependent as it is increasingly on the state, found its functioning curtailed heavily. This is exactly the scenario that we are now going to face. Not only is there a new party in power in the assembly, it should also be noted that that party has not one seat on the corporation’s council. How is this going to be handled? Much will depend on the maturity that the mayor, her council, the new chief minister, his cabinet and the officers who will be assisting all of them. If they learn to put behind them their political ideologies and work for the city’s common good, all will be well.
The term of the present corporation council will expire in 2027. That gives us a year to watch the functioning of the city’s administration. More importantly we need to watch the outcome of the corporation’s elections. If the same party as is in power in the state is elected, all will be well. But if that does not happen, the city will have difficult times ahead.