Judiciary must be encouraged to find ways and means to regulate its own affairs - consistent with the spirit of the Constitution.
Manmohan Singh
Unity and secularism will be the motto of the government. We can't afford divisive polity in India.
India happens to be a rich country inhabited by very poor people.
It is a struggle for the minds of the people... No cause justifies recourse to terrorism.
We are a mixed economy. We will remain a mixed economy. The public and private sector will continue to play a very important role. The private sector in our country has very ample scope and I am confident that India's entrepreneurs have the capacity, and the will to rise to the occasion.
We - what we need is a dialogue among civilizations. And we need multiculturalism, respect for diversity, tolerance, respect for diverse faiths.
If you don't have a functioning financial system the world economy won't be revived. All the major economies have their responsibility to assist at a pace which is required to clean up the balance sheet of the banking system and to ensure that credit flows are resumed.
Life is never free of contradictions.
We removed wealth tax in the 1991 budget. That is one way in which the children of those who had wealth could put money honestly into their enterprises.
I can assure you we are a responsible nuclear power.
We are a coalition government, and that limits our options in some ways. Privatization happens to be one such area.
My top most priority is to deal with India's massive social and economic problems, so that chronic poverty, ignorance and disease can be conquered in a reasonably short period of time.
I believe, whether it is the United States or Europe, they will all end up as multicultural societies. So India's this great experiment of a billion people of such great diverse persuasion, working together, seeking their salvation in the framework of a democracy. I believe it will have some lessons for all the multicultural societies.
When Indian economy was growing at the rate of 8 to 9 percent, I think everybody was quite happy. Even when there were defects in our policies, they were overlooked, and when the economy slows down, people try to find fault and excuses.
Nepal is our closest neighbour, and we must make every effort to ensure that, as a small neighbour, we attend to their perceptions. Even when they are wrong, we have an obligation to create an environment in which the common people in Nepal feel that in India they have a great friend.
Cutting the fiscal deficit is not popular. That is the experience of all governments in all countries. Expenditure cuts hurt certain vested interests, and they don't like it.
Protectionism is a very real danger. It is understandable that in times of a severe downturn protectionist pressures mount but the lessons of history are clear. If we give in to protectionist pressures, we will only send the world into a downward spiral.
Whatever your views on Pakistan, our effort was that we have to engage Pakistan. They are our neighbours. We can choose our friends, but we cannot choose our neighbours.
We got government off the backs of the people of India, particularly off the backs of India's entrepreneurs. We introduced more competition, both internal competition and external competition. We simplified and rationalized the tax system. We made risk-taking much more attractive.
Capitalism historically has been a very dynamic force, and behind that force is technical progress, innovation, new ideas, new products, new technologies, and new methods of managing teams.
Together with international unity and resolve we can meet the challenge of this global scourge and work to bring about an international law of zero tolerance for terrorism.
The future is inherently uncertain.
If you have a rigidly controlled economy, cut off from the rest of the world by infinite protection, nobody has any incentive to increase productivity and to bring new ideas.
We all know the epicentre of terrorism in the world today is Pakistan. The world community has to come to grips with this harsh reality.
One can dismiss the Prime Minister of India most easily. All that is necessary is for Parliament to pass a vote of no-confidence.
If al-Qaeda had not had a home in Afghanistan, maybe 9/11 would never have taken place. God forbid if al-Qaeda gets another strong foothold in Afghanistan.
Nobody should be allowed to tinker with democracy. We will not discontinue the good works of the past government.
The Indian economy grew at 5.5 percent, but if you look at the last 30 years - for example, 1960 to 1985 - the progress made by East Asian countries was phenomenal. In a single generation they had been able to transform the character of their economy. They were able to get rid of chronic poverty.
Yes, I think India's economy always has been a mixed economy, and by Western standards we are much more of a market economy than a public sector-driven economy.
Every day, the Prime Minister is a 24-hour servant of the people of India.
I have dealt with politicians ever since I came into the government in 1971. I have seen many prime ministers, many finance ministers.
I've always believed India is a country blessed by - of - blessed by God with enormous entrepreneurial skills.
Let me say that I think the economic history of the last 150 years clearly shows that if you want to industrialize a country in a short period, let us say 20 years, and you don't have a well-developed private sector, entrepreneurial class, then central planning is important.
Our foreign-exchange reserves when I took over were no more than a billion dollars; that is, roughly equal to two weeks' imports.
Protectionism has to be avoided. Protectionism is not only on goods but also in the area of services. Financial protectionism is also bad and should be avoided.
The Chinese have certain advantages. The fact that it's a single party government. But I do believe in the long run the fact that India is a functioning democracy committed to the rule of law. Our system is slow to move but I'm confident that once decisions are taken they are going to be far more durable.
I have always regarded nonalignment as a statement that India's policies - foreign policy - will be guided by what I describe as 'enlightened national interest.' That means we will make judgments on an independent basis with the sole concern being what is enlightened India's national interest.
We are a democracy: there are enough checks and balances in our country, and we have an impeccable record of not contributing in any way to nuclear proliferation.
A victory for the Taliban in Afghanistan would have catastrophic consequences for the world - particularly for South Asia, for Central Asia, and for the Middle East.
President Karzai's regime is not perfect. There are problems of improving governance. But you cannot transform Afghanistan overnight. It is going to be a long-term affair.
As far as Afghanistan is concerned, I'm not sure whether the United States and Pakistan have the same objectives. Pakistan would like Afghanistan to be under its control.
The National Stock Exchange was strongly opposed by Bombay stockbrokers and captains of industry. I thought some competition is good. The exchange has given a very good account of itself.
When I was the finance minister, I got on well with the RBI Governor.
Certainly, I cannot say that my government's relationship with Pakistan was free of problems. I think the control of terror is our primary concern. And Pakistan made promises it didn't keep.
In matters of state, one has to be full of sentiments, but one can never be sentimental.
Bankers also play politics.
I honestly feel that if there is an important point of view, any member of the Congress party, any member of my Cabinet is free to raise issues and require reconsideration of issues. I think that's what a democracy is about.
