PRAJATANTRA

FDI in Retail – finally, bulldoze

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 06:02:00 +0000

previous article

So finally, riding roughshod over legitimate objections of millions of stakeholders, the Government has formalized its pre-determined decision to open up FDI in Multibrand Retail (FDI in Sell-anything Retail) allowing FDI up to 51% by global players. It has simultaneously removed the restriction of 51% on FDI in single-brand retail and allowed it up to 100% where half a decade after it was first opened up, the benefit to the overall development objective has been zero. (see here and here )

The desperation, determination and insensitivity of the government to push through this so-called “reform” are simply hard to fathom, when it has major issues of failure in governance and economic management to tackle on a more urgent basis. It is but natural that doubts would be raised about the ‘motive’ for this reckless surrender to diktats of some invisible driving force unless it is assumed that government simply wants to create one more diversion or that it has a death wish.

True to its record over the last 6 years, the government has persisted with disinformation and misleading the people and presenting fanciful benefits from FDI in Sell-anything Retail, trying to convert myths into realities by unconvincing advertisements and press conferences. During a press conference the day after the Cabinet decision was taken brushing aside objections within the Cabinet itself, the Commerce Minister, Anand Sharma said:"FDI policy has been evolved after consulting all stakeholders", failing to mention that in consulting stakeholders, contrary views were ignored. In particular, the findings of the Parliamentary Committee representing the collective wisdom of parliamentarians which rejected in 2009 the need for FDI in Retail were also ignored. (see here)

Every misleading argument proposed by the Government over six years as also the larger issue related to international trade policy, has been dealt with in earlier articles in PRAJATANTRA and also in an exhaustive note to the DIPP of the Ministry of Commerce ( see A. B, C, D, E ) )in response to its mock survey with a manipulative questionnaire, conducted in July 2010 which bears careful reading. Incidentally, the majority of the responses to the survey objected to FDI in Retail, a fact which was conveniently glossed over.

The Government has kept on repeating glib arguments pushed to it by the interested parties, and it is worthwhile once again to place the issue in perspective and also to try and correct some misconceived notions which many lay and not-so-lay persons have in this matter. Bluntly put, the entire effort and hard lobbying, formal and informal, by the vested interests to sell their idea has been nothing short of a classic Hustle. The manner in which the government has been gulping down their stories can be crudely compared to a housewife parting with her possessions to a conman promising to double them or similar con games. The vested interests and government have been saying that huge benefits will accrue as a result of and by implication only as a result of FDI in Retail. They are cleverly presented as “likely to..” accrue, in the nature of “forward looking statements” which Walmart and other corporates routinely make to escape any responsibility for assurances not coming true. Once the global retailers have set up their base, nothing can be done if these benefits are not realized; presuming that any kind of monitoring is at all done. This is the same with a Government making tall promises and then failing to realize them.

To have a proper perspective it is first necessary to know the type of brute power the global retailers enjoy in their business. Walmart had net sales of $ 405 billion in 2010 with 8,400 stores in 15 countries. For such huge sales, they engage a mere 2 million (twenty lacs) employees (called associates). The sales of this single player in 2010 were already close to the estimated $450 billion total retail market of India after 10 years in 2020!! Then there are Carrefour ($134 bn.), Tesco ($ 106 billion) and others. Truth be told, all the global players are merely seeking markets and profits in the markets they enter, and are not in the business of performing tasks for the government.

Employment generation?

The Commerce Minister claimed that FDI in multibrand Retail will generate 10 million jobs (when?) of which 6 million will be in logistics sector alone. It is a different matter that the Cabinet Background material claims 1.5m. for front-end and 1.7m. for the back-end retail operation over 5 years, with “millions of jobs” indirectly in the supply chain. This contradiction apart, it flies in the face of practices of the global players e.g. for sales 40 % higher than India’s entire retail market, Walmart has merely 2 m. employees. The other more serious fallacies are two. First, the Minister says that the retail market will grow by 13% “as a result of the new policy” an absurd assertion! It is totally false to suggest that FDI in Retail will actually significantly grow the demand which is determined by other factors mainly the overall economic growth and rising incomes. The retail market will continue to grow and so will employment generation in the retail end as also related logistics areas even without FDI in Retail unless the government expects that global retailers would generate sales by encouraging wasteful consumption habits including by huge imports. It is simply wrong to attribute job creation to FDI in Retail. On the other hand, what is clear that for every job that might be created in FDI outlets, many more will be lost as experience elsewhere, including the USA, has shown and as common-sense suggests. The employment loss due to displacement in the pure domestic sector due to entry of FDI has been deliberately hidden away. Even if we ignore the fact that as FDI retail assumes dominance, many more opportunities for self employment in small retail will be prevented, the inevitable displacement is a cause of great concern as those self employed persons engaged at present in the small retail end may not have the wherewithal to find alternative forms of employment nor do they have a safety net as in other developed countries. When the government says that FDI will be allowed only in a limited number of cities and so others need not worry, it admits that the problem is valid. Besides, it is no comfort to those losing their livelihoods in places where they will be allowed and also in other parts of the country as an indirect fall-out. Even as the government does not seem to have any concern for the small retailers, as it happens, even the US President Obama has begun encouraging the US public to buy from the local small shop!

Other countries

The background paper cites specific countries where FDI in Retail is permitted which is fallacious because each country may take a decision within the overall context of its own situation and what is good for one country need not be good for another. Secondly, if some countries might have benefitted, others have not. As to Brazil, at least one study found no evidence of FDI playing a role in sector growth.( see here ) Russia had been a centralized economy where all sectors including retail were largely under government ownership till 1997 and practically till 2002 before globalization began in 2003. It is not possible to equate the situation in the Russian Retail sector with that of India where essentially, retail has been a private enterprise. As to China, although some liberalization of retail sector had taken place earlier, it opened up the sector really in 2004 to comply with its WTO obligations. Although the Background note cites figures of large retail expansion, there is simply no way that it can be attributed to FDI in Retail, ignoring the huge economic growth, the real engine. Further, by the time China opened up it already had a massive manufacturing base which not only could meet the needs of its own market but also export. It had also some large domestic retailers. Since then, it has become a powerhouse and manufacturing base for the entire world and India stands nowhere in comparison with China’s capabilities in manufacturing as well as its own indigenous organized retail sector.

Bringing down inflation and supply chain efficiencies?

The previous article has discussed in detail how the government is presenting bogus and preposterous assertions that inflation will fall due to FDI in Retail to hide its own failure, due to default or design, in controlling inflation. The argument of improving supply chain efficiencies by FDI in Retail is also a result of complete failure of its previous policy and efforts to reform and transform the supply chain. It has totally failed in doing anything worthwhile to push aggressively to create components of strong supply chains. Let alone cold storage facility for which it has allowed 100% FDI since long, even today it is not fulfilling its primary responsibility of creating storage facility for its own procurement, allowing hundreds of thousands of tons of food to rot. Nor have any significant food processing capacities been built up which would be an important way of preventing loss of product. What is now apparent is that whenever the government fails to reform any aspect of governance, it finds it expedient to simply open up that sector for foreign investment in the guise of “reform”. For everything that cannot be handled, call the foreigners to the rescue.

This apart, it is not certain at all that any dramatic improvement in overall supply chain efficiency can happen purely because of FDI in Retail, even if the retailer somehow invests the required sums in loosely defined “back-end infrastructure”, which essentially would be for his own needs.

Farmer will get higher prices?

This again is a misleading claim to support which, the Background paper cites various figures of total loss due to inadequate infrastructure. The losses of this magnitude have always been there and have been known. Like all infrastructure, this is also an area where the government has failed to create adequate capacities, as mentioned before. If any investment does take place at the hands of the global retailers, it will only meet a fraction of the total needs for facilities, but the Background paper carefully presents the figures to imply that FDI in Retail will be a panacea to solve the huge problem.

As to the farmer getting higher prices, experience in other countries suggests that this may not happen. The factors affecting farmer price realization are many and there is no reason to believe that the global retailers, after making such large investments, will simply be charitable to the farmers and pay them high prices. Even the Background paper says that APMC Act is an impediment to the farmers getting higher prices. If any changes in that Act are made due to which farmers get higher prices, it can not be attributed to FDI. And although cold storage facilities are a distinct business activity which has to be justified on its own economics, the Background paper has quite cleverly tried to link it to the front end retail: “In the absence of FDI in front-end Retail, investment flows into this sector have been insignificant.” The fact is that creating storage capacities which involves easily available technology and expertise has not found interest amongst either domestic or foreign investors as a business proposition, not because there is no FDI in front end retail

The Unique Indian Signature

To make a show that the global players are not going to have a smooth walk-in, the government has stipulated certain conditions which it claims give an Indian character to the policy. These are merely meant to placate and fool those who oppose the move. In fact, the condition of having stores only in larger cities is exactly what the global retailers want at this stage. In the first place, none of these conditions are impossible to fulfill or with some ingenuity, work around. Fulfillment of the condition of 30% sourcing from small enterprises is nearly impossible to monitor. Secondly, as is the case with most regulations with the “Indian” signature, they can and will be relaxed in a short time. A day after the policy announcement, an executive connected with an existing global retailer partnership stated that the conditions are not onerous and can be relaxed. And finally, if any condition is not fulfilled, there is precious little that can be done in practical terms without following a lengthy “due process”. In any case, there is no way that in practice, a business once established would be asked to shut up shop for violation of any of the prescribed conditions. Mention needs to be made specifically of the conditions requiring 30% sourcing from small and medium enterprises. True to character, although the background paper mentions it, when a Cabinet minister made a specific query his attention was not drawn to the fact that the sourcing could be done from anywhere in the world, when the condition is supposed to protect domestic manufacturers. In the initial stages, the government was considering to prescribe a condition for a minimum store space. This condition mysteriously finds no place probably because Walmart have now decided in USA to open small shops ( see here )– a decision which could also be extended to India.

To what lengths will they go

The senior most minister in the Government, while trying to convince his colleagues in the Cabinet meeting, reportedly went to the extent of saying that if FDI in Retail is not approved, Sensex will fall 400 points.( see here )

Such level of desperation and the nature of threat is unheard of. Was the Minister trying to give a message to others to fall in line, knowing that many may have significant interest in what happens to Sensex? Or what could have prompted such an extraordinary remark in a Cabinet discussion? The same minister is also reported to have virtually asked an objecting minister from an ally to shut up.

What they ignore

It is inevitable that smaller indigenous retailers will be displaced in a big way. The government, while grudgingly admitting to the possibility has tried to be totally patronizing by suggesting that they can buy products to sell in their shops from the cash-and-carry global retailers at discount! New as well as existing retailers would find it extremely difficult to get retail space in view of unequal competition from the global retailers for acquiring space. It may be asked by some whether the same effects on employment etc. would not be felt as the competition from domestic organized retail has been increasing. Yes, that can happen and the smaller retailers would have to face the situation as it arises. Domestic organized retailers have a legitimate right to grow as long as the smaller retailers are not discriminated against. In a liberalized economy, retailers large or small will have to co-exist and make the best of their strengths. The issue, however, is that the government has no obligation or need to invite and IMPOSE competition from outside for which there is no justification. It would be unfair to suggest that traders who are benefitting now are the ones who object because the problem is not confined to a few traders. Contrary to scurrilous propaganda, it is not organized retail per se which is objected to, because it has come to stay, but foreign investment and its entry in a sector which calls for no such impending need nor related to overriding national interest. The global retailers will sell not only farm produce but any and all kinds of consumer products, majority being branded, packaged and price-marked products from oragnised manufacturers which do not require any specialisd inputs from the retailers other than shelf space. And in whether they buy (brute bargaining power) or sell, their avowed objective is "to leverage our scale" and they are deeply steeped in the American model of cut-throat competition and gaining market share at any cost. They should not be expected to be kind to competition or even to their domestic suppliers including farmers. Incidentally, this same government has been all along singing the tune of the need for Organised Retail to grow and transform the retail sector. If that was its sincere belief, it should have allowed enough time for them to grow. Now, ironically, even as domestic Organised Retail sector is finding its feet, the government is imposing external competition which will certainly also affect growth of domestic Organised Retail, not only small retailers. This shows that the song of Organised Retail was just a subterfuge and the real intention all along was to bring in the global players.

What the government has failed to acknowledge is that not only will the global players inevitably result in displacement of domestic small retailers; there would be a potentially serious threat to the manufacturing sector for consumer products. The entry of global retailers will provide an excellent entry point for the major world manufacturers notably China without any effort on their part. The global retailers with their enormous financial power and purchasing capacity procure huge quantities already from the Chinese suppliers for their global outlets. Those in India who predict that our manufacturers can withstand competition with Chinese consumer products sold through the global retailers, have, perhaps, inadequate appreciation of the Chinese threat. The imports of consumer products from China have been increasing year to year even with the unorganized imports by relatively small importers and domestic small and medium manufacturers are finding it difficult to compete. When the same products are imported in an organized manner by the global retailers using their huge buying strength, imports will grow in depth as well as breadth and many more manufacturers will face serious difficulties. More important, India does not have as yet a manufacturing base as large as that of China which would be needed to meet the growing demand in India and new manufacturing capacities need to be built up on a large scale. The growing Chinese imports will affect establishment of fresh manufacturing capacities with cheap imports getting more entrenched. Imports of produce from all over the world, particularly fresh fruit, will also increase significantly. This is a problem which exists already and will be exacerbated.

Others airing homilies

Then there are arm chair dreamers with exaggerated notions of India’s superiority, bravado or naiveté with little idea of ground realities that ask: for a country wanting to be super power, why should we object to FDI in Retail? It is an idle and absurd question. Well, is allowing FDI in Retail an indicator of being a super power by any yardstick? Far from being near a superpower status, India is way down in the world order by any number of parameters of human development, health, education, poverty, scientific, technological and industrial development, infrastructure, quality of governance, corruption, etc. and whether FDI in Retail is allowed or not will not affect its status one way or the other. In fact, if we need to seek foreign help and crutches in every sector including retail to set our things in order, it is a sure indicator that we are not fit to be a super power.

Those who compare FDI in Retail with the introduction of computer technology or liberalisation of automobile licensing make irrelevant comparisons as FDI in Retail does not bring any revolutionary technology (computers) or bring manufacturing capacity for new products for which India does not have technology (automobiles).

Then again, there are those who say that consumers need choices and FDI in Retail will give choices. What choices? The Indian consumer today who can afford to ask for “choice” has a wide choice of products to buy to the extent of confusion in what to buy. And more and more products are already coming in the market every day. Choices come from products manufactured, the retailers do not manufacture things; they procure and sell. Also, competition is growing not only for products but there is already a choice as to from which retailer to buy. Those who brand all small retailers as cheats have the freedom to buy from their malls. Those who ask for more choice, forget that even with a benchmark Rs 32 per day, 80% of the people are still poor and the only choices they have is whether to have rice and daal twice a day or once or to go hungry. Those who ask for more choice from foreign retailers because they can afford to spend may do well to spare a thought for the self employed retailers who eke out a living now and who may lose their means of livelihood.

The Underdog - Forever?

Despite the knowledge that India is the second largest potential market and every foreign major who is constantly seeking markets for its products would go to great lengths and be prepared to pay the price to secure a foothold in this market, the government continues to pay scant attention to the enormous bargaining power the country has while opening up the market to outsiders. In Trade related matters (or even larger issues) it continues to act as the underdog (forget being a superpower) and demonstrate a servile approach. This is best demonstrated in its relaxation of policy for single-brand retail. It says, in justification: “Globally, single brand retail follow a business model of 100% ownership and global majors have been reluctant to establish their presence in a restrictive policy environment”. So, 100% FDI should be allowed! Well, what makes the government so desperate to invite single-brand retail by relaxing its existing policy? Does single-brand retailing meet any nationally accepted objective? In any case, the positive effect of existing single-brand retailers has been zero. There are thousands of single brand retailers in the world. Even while being aware of the potential for the Indian market if they chose not to come unless 100% retail is allowed, it is no loss to the country. If they chose to stay away, so be it. Is the country going to miss out that such meek servility needs to be shown? No.

The same approach is evident even in FDI in multibrand retail. It is clear that by showing illusory benefits from their presence, those who have been desperate to enter the lucrative market have successfully managed to convince the government that it is they who would be doing the country a favour by entering the market. They are now being allowed free entry into the huge market without any cost, other than what they have to invest to run their show. Nor is there any evidence to show that the country has managed to build any negotiating strength on the global trade policy front by opening up (which cannot be reversed) without any significant gains. Along with the global retailers, even China would get a free run.

This is India, the super-power.

Beguiled by the “FDI in Retail” Bug

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:50:00 +0000

previous article here

For over six years, Sardar Manmohan Singh has been doggedly persisting to thrust upon the country his idea of allowing FDI in multi-product Retail. It seems to have become his consuming obsession on par with his other objectives of the Nuclear Deal, 9% GDP growth and improving relations with Pakistan.

So smitten by the FDI in Retail Bug he appears to be that he and his government have been trying to push for a policy change to facilitate entry of the global retailers who have beguiled them with fanciful assertions of wonderful benefits that they may bring to the country. Various gambits have been used by the government to deceive the people by bogus arguments, which appear to be mostly cut-and-paste jobs from presentations made by global retailers like Walmart and a handful of domestic large business groups keen to partner with the global retailers and eventually sell their stakes to the foreign partners at high valuations at the right time. The global retailers do not have any philanthropic objectives. What they want is to simply gain a foothold at an early stage in potentially the second largest market in the world for their own profits and increase the value of their businesses by vaguely promising the moon (and other planets) to an obliging government eager to swallow whatever is dished out by them.

Despite objections, the government earlier allowed FDI in Wholesale Cash-and-Carry and later in Single Brand Retail. It has thereafter not bothered to take a review of the actual impact of these policy relaxations simply because little or no benefits have accrued, which was only to be expected. (See the lofty- but unrealized- benefits of FDI in single-brand retail here) But the relaxation is a fait accompli and cannot be reversed. On multi-product retail, it has just been ignoring the stiff resistance and strident protests and sound objections of the majority of domestic retail trade, political parties (mainly the Left Parties) and others and has even glossed over a Parliamentary Committee Report not supporting FDI in multi-product Retail.

In July 2010, to try and push Manmohan Singh’s agenda before the arrival of US President Obama in India, the DIPP released a “Discussion Paper” seeking views from the public, a completely insincere and mock exercise with carefully devised manipulative questions with exactly half a question actually asking whether FDI in Retail should be permitted! (see previous article here). The government would have been keen to announce a relaxation at the time of US President Obama’s visit. But unlike Bush, Obama’s priority was to create more jobs IN USA itself and not to get Walmart in India. And so, poor Manmohan Singh was forced to miss the opportunity to please him on that score. Unfortunately too, 109 respondents to the Discussion Paper objected and only 69 supported a relaxation. (here) DIPP at that time in March 2011 chose NOT to make any recommendation, for the reason that opponents to FDI in Retail outnumbered supporters – something they might not have expected.

The Disingenuous Last push
Not ready to give up, Manmohan Singh set up an Inter-Ministerial Group (IMG) in January 2011 under the Chief Economic Advisor, Dr. Kaushik Basu, “to review the inflation situation and suggest corrective measures.” The IMG was entrusted with the task of studying and proposing policies pertaining to (a) food article inflation and (b) macro-economic demand management.

The IMG met three times. In the first meeting (here), some “important” (read mundane) initial decisions were taken about how information from various sectors of the Indian economy would be collated and systems developed for early warning systems. Issues like link between futures market and price rise, market margins, agricultural productivity issues and the role of State Governments and District administration in price management were also touched upon. In the second meeting (here) there was discussion on the need to revise APMC Act and encourage competition among traders and also to promote efficiency in retailing. Hoping to get support for FDI in Retail, the IMG also invited a private retailer involved in organized retail to make a presentation. Significantly, almost all the points made by that retailer related to better post harvest management and one aspect of APMC but he did not think that cold chains (one principal excuse to justify FDI in Retail) would have a great impact. Only in the final third meeting on 6th May, 2011 (here), where even the RBI Governor made a presentation, various macro-economic issues of real significance were discussed. The IMG Chairman himself emphasized that there was concern that the very nature of global inflation may be changing. (Nothing to do with the structure of retail trade at all)

Manmohan's Genie
(see previous article)

Voilà, the Genie will bust inflation
In three meetings, there was no mention of FDI in multi-product Retail except a fleeting reference once to encourage competition and promote efficiency in retailing. Yet, when the IMG actually came out with its recommendations on 27th May 2011 (here), lo and behold! Suddenly, it pulled out the rabbit from its hat – FDI in multi-product retail – Manmohan Singh’s Genie who will bust inflation which the entire government has failed to do. As it has turned out, the entire exercise seems to have been undertaken only to push one agenda -FDI in multi-product retail.

The pre-determined plan becomes manifest, seeing that the IMG decision was dovetailed to a cabinet note circulated over a week earlier in middle of May 2011 by the DIPP to the Committee of Secretaries seeking views on opening up. The plan became more evident on 18th May 2011 when the Minister of State for Commerce said: “We are committed to the issue on FDI in retail...I think over the next quarter you will see a decision and an announcement…” Even details of an OECD report conveniently appeared on 25th May, 2011 saying that liberalization of FDI in retail sector would help in easing pressures of food inflation.

The Chairman of IMG, Kaushik Basu said “It is time for India to allow foreign direct investment in multi-product retail and the IMG recommends that the government considers this at the earliest. Reform in this sector can be an effective inflation busting measure”. He grandly declared: "We are taking a clear position on FDI in multi-brand retail for the first time.” But who had asked them to take a clear position on a relatively minor side issue compared to their much wider mandate? Was the group formed to consider FDI in Retail and take a position on the same? Rather than seriously dealing with its actual mandate which included macro economic demand management and all aspects related to inflation, the entire thrust of the IMG recommendations is only to open up FDI in multi-product retail with another suggestion on the side for making changes in agricultural produce marketing laws. By implication, these two measures are all that the doctor orders as far as seen from media reports. It is unthinkable that such a high powered group expected to make macro-level suggestions on tackling inflation should come up with a pedestrian recommendation that too, based on false premises which cannot pass muster.

The unstructured and superficial approach and resultant contradiction is evident even at first glance. While claiming that FDI will reduce inflation, in the same breadth it says “However along with FDI in retail, there was need for regulator to ensure that these new corporations do not become monopolistic and charge high prices. Reduction in inflation and charging high prices will happen at the same time? In trying to make out a fictitious case for FDI, the IMG has tied itself up into knots with similar other contradictions.

Bogus assertions
The government has been making almost wild unsubstantiated assertions and presenting devious arguments to support a non-existent case for FDI in multi-product Retail. Each and every such argument has been earlier shown to be fallacious. Not only have the assertions been refuted but even the negative aspects pointed out by various trade bodies and political parties that have dealt with them over this period.

PRAJATANTRA has been consistently highlighting right from 2005, in a detailed manner, the fallacies of the arguments supporting FDI in Retail and trying to show that there is no justification for allowing FDI in Retail at all. See a series of articles referred to here
Also see Reports by CPAS here and here ,
Feedback received by DIPP on its Discussion Paper here (PRAJATANTRA/Lokadhikar submissions at Feedback 32)
And the Parliamentary Report here

Some of the arguments by IMG, including the specious one that it will reduce inflation need to be touched upon again.

For example, the IMG Chairman Basu while talking about the recommendations said: China, Malaysia and Indonesia have had “palpable” benefits by opening up multi-brand retail to FDI. Precisely what were these unspecified “palpable” benefits? What the IMG was concerned with was “INFLATION” and nothing else. Nevertheless, this argument has several fallacies. First, each country has its own structure of retail trade and requirements for retail framework which will dictate government policies for the sector. In India, we have a unique network of hundreds of thousands of small retailers which the government for its own convenience prefers to deride now as “mom and pop” stores but which provides the real backbone of the retail structure admirably serving every nook and corner of the country so far. The reference to China is not relevant, one reason being that China allowed FDI in multi-product retail at a late stage only after having first developed its own organized retail sector to a competitive level. It also happens to have a massive manufacturing base for consumer products that not only meets its own needs but has capabilities to supply the world. Examples of Indonesia and Malaysia which are not comparable in terms of economy, consumer base or the vast retail infrastructure of India are also not strictly relevant. Even if these countries have experienced a positive identifiable impact, do all countries with global retailers have the same experience without any negative impact? Walmart has presence in 14 countries, Tesco in 13 and Carrefour in 34. Have the retail sectors in all these countries been transformed BECAUSE of the advent of the global retailers? And, as the main absurd proposition of the IMG is that “inflation will be reduced” by global retailers; has this happened in all or at least a majority of countries and has any demonstrable cause and effect correlation been established in these countries? And how is it verified on a continuous basis? Has inflation in China, for example, reduced because of FDI in Retail? In fact, this assertion has been proven to be false, as can be seen from earlier articles in PRAJATANTRA.

A fantastic assertion made by Basu is that “FDI in multi-brand retail would also help in narrowing the current account deficit. Attracting more FDI would be useful as it is not volatile like FII flow” Quite incredible poppycock this! In fact, current account deficit may increase over a period, both on account of higher imports and regular outflows. It will increase outflows on imports when the global retailers take advantage of their worldwide sourcing options and compete locally in India with imports from China and other countries - something that will adversely affect even domestic manufacturers. China and other Asian suppliers will have a far easier access to the Indian market for their consumer products through these global retailers and eventually some large retailers from there will also come in. This definite fall-out has already been recognized by IMG saying that “To ensure India is not flooded with foreign goods with opening up of retail, the existing import duty and restrictions if any would continue”. This is absurd, because large quantities of Chinese goods are now being imported by smaller players at the existing duty levels. The global players will simply increase the volumes manifold because their procurement would be at lower cost. And since we are talking about FDI flow in specific sector viz. retail, how will FII flow in general be reduced or become less volatile as claimed? And was checking volatility of FII flows at all a part of the expert advice sought?

Basu also said that opening up of the sector posed no danger to small retailers. “The (retail) cake is so big and it will continue to grow.” Well, if the cake is big and growing, should not the benefit of the cake be shared amongst the domestic players and the wealth generated remain within the country? Just because consumption will grow, does not mean that FDI can be gifted a share in the pie especially as there is no real value-added by the FDI in Retail at the consumer-end. There is nothing that they do which cannot be done by domestic entrepreneurs. The Retail end does not depend upon any rocket science as the government would like us to believe. And there is no dearth of domestic capital for the right project that FDI has to be relied upon. What will happen with FDI is that for relatively small initial investment, the global retailers will suck out of the country by means of dividend repayments, fictitious service charges etc. and appreciation of their equity, many times more than their paltry investment, for all time to come - a continuous drain completely disproportionate to any illusive “benefits”.

The final bogus argument used by IMG, which was also not a point to be addressed by them is that FDI would increase exports. How? A business set up to meet Indian consumer needs will increase exports? For their global sourcing, these retailers already have their specialized sourcing offices in whichever countries they need to source from and a domestic retail operation would have little influence on their global sourcing which would depend upon the most competitive source anywhere in the world.

All these arguments are presented by IMG acting only as apologists for FDI in Retail and not for addressing the larger mandate.

Many other mendacious arguments like employment generation etc. will be bandied about again in the Government’s Goebellian ways, all of which have been refuted. The Government has quite deceptively been trying to equate organized retail with FDI in retail to project some of these benefits. Organized retail from domestic entrepreneurs has been increasing and will continue to increase as a logical evolution and development of the retail sector which should be left to be decided by market forces. Some benefits may also accrue long term from organized retail. But that is not to say that Organized Retail means and is equated to FDI.

Reduction in Inflation? –Lies and Deceit
It is a preposterous lie to suggest that inflation will be reduced due to FDI in Retail as it relies on deliberate obfuscation. Inflation is the overall general upward movement of prices in an economy. It relates to the rate of inflation, that is, the variation in price levels from one period to another. (e.g. here) This is the basis of the Inflation Index – e.g. WPI - and it is the continuous high rate of inflation that was to be addressed by IMG.

The real reasons for the back-breaking inflation of food articles have to do with fiscal and monetary management, working of MSP mechanism, demand-supply management, failure to augment storage infrastructure, forward trading, inflation in input and transportation costs and such macro issues. In India in the last few years, a major factor for sudden price spurts has been the deliberate and manipulative mismanagement of demand, supply, export, import, MSP and storage for government procurement from high levels of government, which allowed speculators, hoarders and vested interests to fuel inflation and make billions at the cost of the aam admi. These manipulations have been no less than the other massive scams seen in recent years. Yet, the Prime Minister has failed to address even this known issue.

All these issues are squarely in government domain. So for a committee of the best experts within the government to make a facile suggestion of allowing FDI in multi-product retail as the best solution to reduce inflation creates a grave doubt about the capabilities of those in charge of economic governance! This question is extremely pertinent as the Government headed by an economist of world-acclaim, supported by an all-knowing Padma Vibhushan Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission, a senior Minister with years of experience in charge of Finance Ministry and scores of pseudo-experts have miserably failed to pinpoint or find solutions to tackle the causes of the unacceptable inflation, moving like babes in the woods. Worse, from PM down to bureaucrats all have been deceiving the public month after month that the worst of inflation was over, it had peaked out and prices would start stabilizing or going down without having a clue as to the whys and wherefores.

Where is the role of FDI in multi-product retail in actually “reducing inflation” i.e. rate of inflation or WPI as a whole or even for food sector from period A to period B and so on? How can it influence the basic determinants (see above)? What magic will it do that prices will start reducing progressively? Will they just keep reducing their own prices regardless of their input costs not going down? Are there any logical calculations to show this amazing feat and its mechanism at least on paper? What exactly is the principle? Is it only based on the theory of competition? If so, do we need to import even competition?

While arguing that FDI will reduce inflation, IMG again contradicts itself saying “it can have a sharp desirable effect in the short-run of bringing inflation down in food articles”. There, the cat is out of the bag. So, is this so-called “reduction in inflation” from FDI going to be for the short-run? And how soon can this happen – say next month or one, two, three years after a global retailer arrives? And how long will that remain? And for such doubtful short-run impact, we allow them a permanent foothold? Does the Government so firmly believe in the complete gullibility of the country that it is trying to play this deception and fraud by lulling the people’s worries with such false assurances?

Basu presents another disingenuous obfuscation: “the main cause of Inflation is the yawning gap between farm-gate and retail prices of agri-products and this gap will be reduced considerably as in other countries by opening up organized retail, thereby helping in controlling inflation.” Is this the MAIN cause of inflation, really? (Which other countries? substantiate with evidence) Indeed, a large gap between farm-gate and consumer price which remains constant could not be a cause for the “INFLATION” which is the result of variables for the specified period. Secondly, see how cleverly, FDI is confused and equated with organized retail? Again, there is nothing to substantiate the hypothesis that the “yawning gap” between farm gate and retail prices will be reduced merely and ONLY by FDI, because even that gap is the result of various factors over which the retailer has no control. For a proper understanding, the “yawning gap” must be broken down into various cost components and systematically analyzed to see to what extent and by what means the gap can be reduced and where does the Retailer fit in towards achieving this. IMG itself suggests changes in APMC Act “to reduce the price gap between farm gate and consumer prices”. Is it not what they claim that FDI will do? Another contradiction! Furthermore, there is evidence that in some countries the farmer realization has, in fact, been reduced to the gain of the global retailer.

Another fake argument by IMG is that retail continued to be primitive and there was evidence that there are large losses that occur as products pass through the supply chain from farm to the retail customer. “Because of dated technology and managerial methods used to move products from one part to another, there is value erosion that occurs all the way. This, in turn, raised the price that consumers have to pay” All this is supposed to be cured only by FDI in Retail. The argument that supply-chain improvement and outdated technology needs FDI in Retail to address is false. In today’s liberalized environment, the Indian entrepreneur has no difficulty in sourcing the best in terms of technology and managerial know-how from anywhere in the world to improve the supply chain. Each component of the supply chain is a distinct activity and no global retailer is going to get involved in the entire supply chain except perhaps to meet his own needs in a handful of products. To suggest that FDI in Retail can transform the supply chain which feeds the entire domestic needs is laughable. Are supply chain considerations not relevant for small traders? From where would they get their requirements? Each operation from farm level to warehousing to transport to cold chains (where relevant) has to be tackled, independently of the retail shop, at the macro level on a massive scale for any real “transformation of supply chain”, not just one or two global players catering to their own needs. The cold-chain issue is pertinent only for fruit and vegetables, poultry, fish and meat, and milk products for many of which facilities exist already but the demand for frozen raw produce is still not growing in a big way, the preference being still for fresh products. And if even the government with all its capabilities to incentivize entrepreneurs has failed for such a long time to do anything to transform the supply chains why then do the ministries of food processing and agriculture exist and how will FDI in Retail do it?

Even being completely charitable to the false assertion that FDI at the Retail end will bring down inflation or even the price-gap between farm gate and consumer price, where in the country and for how many products will this happen? The scourge of inflation and high prices is spread over the length and breadth of the country and felt by 1.2 billion people. IF, by the Government’s own proposal, the global retailers come in a few cities, any favorable impact (doubtful) would be localized in the area where they operate. How can their existence make any difference to countrywide price levels and even in their area, in how many products from the basket of hundreds of food articles? Would it make a difference to the overall WPI and headline inflation with which the IMG was really concerned? Is the IMG suggesting that these factors of supply chain and retail structure deficiencies which are a given, have been the causes of high rate of inflation? Did we have such high inflation over all these years? If the same conditions have persisted over the years, how could the inflation increase due to these constant factors? How the problem of inflation would be addressed by FDI at the Retail end, even assuming that only FDI can set right these deficiencies across the total spectrum? And most importantly: do these “experts” conclude conversely that inflation would not be controlled or reduced unless FDI is allowed – which is the main recommendation? Should such nonsense ever be considered? Is there any estimate or even guesstimate, howsoever wild as to by what points would the inflation be “reduced” by the FDI Genie? Is such an effect verifiable at all? And who is accountable if that estimate is proved wrong? Let the Government present a White Paper (or Green Paper) with proofs, evidences and calculations to substantiate whatever it says will happen. It will not. It does not have a record of transparency.

Point to Ponder - why the desperation?
It is not for the domestic stake-holders to prove harm, to object to FDI in retail. It is for the government to convince the stake-holders with demonstrable and provable arguments. This the government has failed to do in spite of many assertions of mythical benefits but expects the stake-holders to take its word or prove otherwise. Argument that FDI will be allowed with A or B restriction or condition holds no water when the proposition itself is fundamentally unsound. Even so, the "restrictions" themselves are devised to actually suit what the global retailers want. Manmohan Singh might have given a commitment to outsiders just as in the case of the Nuke deal, to open up FDI in Retail as retailers like Walmart have apparently been made privy to the policy change in advance.

The question that needs an answer is: Is this change in policy, having no major significance in the larger context so crucial to Manmohan Singh only because of his personal commitment or a desire to earn praise as a champion of free trade, that the government is hell-bent on riding roughshod over so many objections? Or, as the experience of the last few scam-filled years shows, there is more to it than meets the eye with the whiff of some quid pro quo? Has someone in a position to influence government decisions taken a lesson from what Jahangir did while granting permission to the East India Company to set foot in India? Read on:

see full letter here

The present government or the person heading it has absolutely no credibility left that would convince us that their decisions are based purely on objectivity.

The Silence of a Buddha

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 18:56:00 +0000

Buddha: (Sanskrit) बुद्ध : awakened, wise, one who is aware, full of knowledge
Honest: amongst other meanings: 1.honorable in principles, intentions, and actions 2.showing uprightness and fairness 3.respectable; having a good reputation
Integrity: amongst other meanings: adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty

For too long, the people of the country have been led to think that the country is privileged to have a person with honesty and integrity like Manmohan Singh as the Prime Minister. Back in 2004, when he was nominated to become the Prime Minister by his party boss he did carry with him the image of an honest man with integrity and the people rightly took him at face value. Although honesty and integrity are supposed to be the basic qualifications for anyone professing to serve the country, setting great store by this super-honest tag the people gave him wide latitude and glossed over the mismanagement and the follies of his government. Thanks to a straying opposition, the new elections did not result in a badly needed change and once again saw him back as the PM in a coalition with some changes in partners. The mis-governance continued and massive scams, including the largest scam in the world, which had their roots in his first term, reared their heads and shocked the conscience of a hitherto believing and trusting public.

It is time now for the people to shed their indifference, stop being condescending and bring into focus the mismanagement, failures, wrongdoings and deliberate inactions in governance under his leadership. It is time to show that a bloody spade must be called a bloody spade. Let Manmohan Singh’s oft-cited virtues of honesty and integrity as well as competence, so enthusiastically propagated by his party for its own ends, be tested on the touchstone of his performance in a few key areas.

Of internal security
In his first term, in the face of terror attacks and naxal-maoist insurgency gaining ground on a scale never seen before, Manmohan Singh sat unmoved, choosing to rely on Shivraj Patil, the most indolent and incompetent Home Minister ever. He had no courage to sack his Minister under whom the internal security situation had been drifting towards a morass. He could not even muster the courage to state clearly the policy of his Government towards terror. (see here) Only the 26/11 terror attack finally made him to sack Shivraj and start taking the internal security threats somewhat less indifferently. The situation has since improved only slightly. (see here) Since 2006, despite continuous public outcry against the delay in deciding the Mercy Petition of Afzal Guru, he has not done anything to ensure that the decision on his Petition as also on many others was expedited, except merely calling for details of pending mercy petitions just once in Sept. 2008 but has kept on talking about “legal process” taking its course when the judicial process was already over in 2006. (see here) But Manmohan Singh is an honourable man (as Mark Antony had said of Brutus in a different context).

O-Mamma and Obama

Of external affairs
His proclivity for pursuing the gentle dictates of the USA in foreign policy and global issues is already known. For this, he seems happy to occasionally get a meaningless approbation like “when he speaks, everyone listens – Obama”. His blunder in Sharm-el-Sheikh (Sharm-el-Singh) in July 2009 in the Indo-Pak Joint Statement compromising the Indian position presumably under pressure from USA is not forgotten by the people. Even his own party had then seriously doubted his ability in the conduct of foreign affairs. And whether it is border disputes with China or failure of Pakistan to co-operate in the Mumbai terror investigations, the country seems to remain at the losing end. He has ensured continuance of the poor performance by hanging on to S. M. Krishna, the mirror image of Shivraj Patil in terms of ineffectiveness. But Manmohan Singh is an honourable man.

Of economic management
His stance on domestic economy too follows the American ideas of globalization. In his role of an economist steering the economy he has been obsessed with GDP growth (India’s Mr. 9 %), stock exchange indices and to a smaller extent FDI in Retail which he has been hell bent on allowing in the country by propounding false rationale. In his mind, all he needs to prove himself a successful PM is to deliver on 9% GDP growth. (see here) All else other than this, seem to be of small consequence. The 9% growth has so far proved to be a mirage but the PM as also the good-only-for-talking Montek Singh and the Finance Minister at every available opportunity keep bandying about GDP estimates which do little for the ground reality. The negative sides are no one’s responsibility. The infrastructure sector has been lagging behind with no serious concern or control being visible. Worse, six years of utter neglect, mismanagement and manipulation of the agriculture economy for private ends has brought the present and long term food security on a brink. The most incompetent and indifferent Agriculture Minister Pawar whose legendary greed and corrupt ways are known to the world, continues to mess around. Yet, nothing has been done by the PM about either Agriculture or the Minister. He also does not seem to be concerned about the systematic mismanagement of the national airlines and the stories of massive corruption in matters related to Civil Aviation, a portfolio under Pawar’s coadjutant Praful Patel. (see here)

And the man who could not sleep at night because one Indian was wrongly arrested in a foreign land losing his freedom for some time, has not told the people that he has lost any sleep for the thousands of farmers who end up actually losing their LIVES. At the same time, the back-breaking and soaring inflation has continued to give sleepless nights to the common man for over six years now. (see example) The supposed expert in economics and his team look on helplessly. Perhaps he thinks that it is inevitable and acceptable. For umpteen number of times, he and his cohorts - the irrelevant Montek, the two Finance Ministers and the Agriculture Minister – have knowingly repeated false assurances of inflation coming “under control” when the situation on the ground shows exactly the opposite. In a blatant effort to fool the people, indulging in tomfoolery, they are even projecting FDI in Retail as their solution to meet the problems of inflation, the farmers and the common man at the same time! (see here) It is inconceivable that what the common man can sense and experience, they do not. They know their salve is ineffective. But Manmohan Singh is an honourable man, so are they all, all honourable men.

A helpless lot

Of Governance
Manmohan Singh became PM in a coalition government in 2004. In any coalition, compromises are to be expected, because parties having different ideologies and different views and approaches to policy and governance would have to find acceptable middle ground on contentious issues and the people would have to contend with such situations.

But Manmohan has fostered a concept of coalition that suits his party and also other allies but is causing immense damage to the interests of the people. First and foremost, he has sought to give a complete go-by to the principle of collective responsibility of the Cabinet enshrined in the Constitution:
Art.74(1) There shall be a Council of Ministers with the Prime Minister at the head xxxx
Art.75(3) The Council of Ministers shall be collectively responsible to the House of the People.

This means that all policies of the Government are deemed to have been formulated collectively and all the Ministers are collectively responsible for it to the legislature. On the principle of collective responsibility, he cannot put the onus and accountability merely on a minister for any wrongdoing, he (as also every member of his Cabinet) is necessarily a party to whatever wrong may have been committed. In practice, Singh is continuously trying to avoid his responsibility as the head of the Cabinet.

Giving a perverse meaning to coalition government, the system functioning now is akin to an intra-cabinet federal system where the coalition parties each having domains which they have chosen themselves in the first place, are free to take any decision in respect of their fiefdom particularly relating to the spoils of office. In fact on every occasion the PM does not act against a truant minister or set right a wrong policy, the media quickly jumps in to rationalise it as “compulsions of coalition politics”. This is the first justification, manufactured by his party minions, by mindless or manipulated media and accepted by the public that he has capitalized on. The second justification, assumed by most to be a reason for his inactions, is that he is constrained by the wishes of his boss. Without saying anything, he has allowed such an impression to gain ground. Around these two excuses, a carefully nurtured façade of a helpless, innocent man impeded from doing what is right has been created. Far from being embarrassed, he finds it beneficial to hide his defaults behind this façade. But Manmohan Singh is an honourable man.
Of Probity
The first important test of his probity was the Lok Sabha Vote of Confidence on 22nd July 2008, when he won the vote due to a brazen display of money power to retain power. No matter that the plans to buy the votes of MPs with cash or other temptations was executed by Singh’s party, it was he as Prime Minister who directly benefited by retaining his position. He revealed his other side when, confronted on the talk of money being offered, he bluntly asked for ‘proof’. The means deployed did not mean anything to him and he felt justified in asking for “proof” of wrongs committed for his benefit which he ought to have known. It is worthwhile quoting from the article on the matter in Prajatantra:

“And finally it is also hoped that, Manmohan Singh, a man of impeccable integrity and with the supreme national interest of the country always at heart, will reflect deeply upon his victory. Just as he asked the MPs to vote according to their conscience he will, hopefully, also ask his own conscience whether what he has won was worth the serious dent to his image that he has undoubtedly suffered. For the present, it does appear that he has adjusted himself to his surroundings even if that means lowering the high standard of probity that he might have once had. He also seems to be rejoicing for the moment, having fulfilled a solemn promise that he made to the U.S. President some time back. At least on that score he has convinced himself that the end justified the means.”

The pious hope has since been belied. But Manmohan Singh is an honourable man.
More relevant at this time is the handling of the subjects directly under him and for which he alone is responsible. In an important matter like Right to Information, he has been favoring the bureaucrats who want file notings to be removed from its purview and continue to avoid their responsibility. The appointment of P.V.Thomas as the CVC which he cleared ignoring the opposition leader’s objection and even the Home Minister’s reluctance has come under judicial scrutiny. What is really unconscionable is the misuse of CBI which falls under the Ministry of Personnel under his charge. No one has any doubts that the CBI is blatantly misused particularly in cases with political implications and it is clearly seen to be working under directions from above. Can anyone believe that some bureaucrat in the PMO is merrily going about directing CBI how specific cases should be handled? Can the Minister of State dare to do so, on his own? Or does the PM let PMO or his MoS or the CBI take orders from some extra-constitutional unseen hand that holds sway over him? The answer is a clear NO and the real answer is that whatever happens or does not happen is only on the basis of what the PM directs either himself or through his MoS or concerned Secretary. He is aware; he is full of knowledge – a Buddha. But Manmohan Singh is an honourable man.

Of the ultimate in guile and deceit - Cover them up
The biggest test of his probity, integrity, honesty and all that he stands for has been the handling of the hugely-huge scams which took place under his very nose and the efforts to save the corrupt which have exposed him thoroughly. In the CWG Scam involving thousands of crores of public money, all steps have been taken to ensure that those who are really guilty never get their just punishment. The CBI investigations have been confined only to relatively small specific transactions of expenditure by the OC. Even preliminary actions on the larger ones from the OC expenditure as also the many times larger ones involving the Delhi government, its agencies and the central ministries where the beneficiaries are believed to be his high and mighty have not been initiated. Where action is initiated, it is ensured that unlike any normal investigation, the progress is slow and more than enough time has been given to the culprits to cover their tracks. To top up these make-believe actions, Manmohan Singh has set up a completely irrelevant and useless Shunglu committee which everyone knows to be an undisguised diversion.

Sitting guard, half-exposed Cabinet
The 2G Scam, the world’s biggest, involving Rs. 176,000 crores of loss to the public exchequer, shows a similar but more damning course of events. Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister has been aware of the scam in all its ramifications since 2007 having been repeatedly alerted about the smoke and fire emanating and having virtually observed the progress of the scam at various stages, including when he himself made a half-hearted attempt to stop it from going further. He did not lift another finger to stop the loot. In this Scam as well, apart from most reluctantly sacking A.Raja when he was pushed into doing it, he and his government have taken similar make-believe actions including setting up of a committee by his Telecom Minister that means nothing for punishing the culprits. The talks of taking actions against the licensees, recovering fines etc. are just lollipops without sweetness. Like in CWG Scam, the CBI investigation is moving at less than a trot and once again, plenty of time has been given to the perpetrators. In a major insult to his government even the Supreme Court had to make harsh comments on the casual approach shown by the government agencies. But there is also a more serious aspect to this Scam that probably he at least apprehends about. The fact that he has all along been aware of wrongdoing in the matter and did not take steps which he was bound to take to prevent it but allowed the Scam to continue could, just possibly, make his personal position vulnerable if the case turns into a criminal matter. If not in legal terms, at least in moral terms he is culpable. Even recently he obliquely defended the culprits and partially himself too. Addressing a CBI conference, which discussed measures to make the anti-corruption law more stringent, Singh said, "We must learn to make a distinction between an honest mistake and deliberate malfeasance. In dealing with a mistake, rather than a wrong-doing, we should not discourage individual initiative." TNN 18.11.06 Significantly, in his address to AICC recently, he had said that he might have made mistakes, which could as well refer to his inaction on the Scams.

In tandem with the insincere actions by Manmohan Singh’s government, his party too has been stalling the completely justified demand for special Parliamentary Committees not just for one but both the scams, which is what the people of the country want. The people are holding them to account for their own misdeeds and in that context, their rhetoric of the opposition parties being also corrupt is not relevant for the people. He and his party are desperately trying to diffuse the focus of the nation in both the Scams so that the actions do not reach the logical end of catching the prepetrators and the ultimate beneficiaries. Is it because of coalition compulsion or the wishes of his boss? He will not say but the people have already reached their conclusion. And for all practical purposes, the people will have to write-off the nearly Rs. 2 lac crore lost in just these two Scams due to trusting a man with “unimpeachable integrity” and allowing his Government to function. But Manmohan Singh is an honourable man.

Of Loyalty

Important to know one's place

Once when he decided to be his own man, went against the Left Parties’ views on the Nuclear Deal and brought the government on the brink, the people thought that he had it in him to “break free” whenever his conscience told him to. He had said of the Left parties “They wanted me to behave as their bonded slave.” (see here) It is sad that he does not think the same way about his boss even now but has kept himself most willingly in shackles no matter what the compromises and damage to his own image. His actions speak louder than words as to where his loyalty lies although he keeps reinforcing the same by ingratiating words towards his boss under whose power of attorney he functions. Perhaps, with a twinge of conscience nagging him he has pondered over once again “breaking free” but like Hamlet, has not found the answer to the question: To be or not to be.

There are echoes of his condition in a song by The Clash:Should I stay or should I go now?

If I go there will be trouble, An’ if I stay it will be double
So come on and let me know!
This indecision’s bugging me, If you don’t want me, set me free

Manmohan Singh may also care to read the following lines and decide how very appropriate they would sound from his mouth:"All men make faults, and even I in this, (Everybody commits faults and even I, in doing this)
Authorizing thy trespass with compare, (Justifying your crimes by comparisons,)
Myself corrupting, salving thy amiss, (Making myself a corrupt pleader by trying to remedy your misdeeds,)"
(Shakespeare Sonnet XXXV)

Not finally….
Taken in totality, he is heading a corrupt government that has no conscience, one that is virtually holding the country to ransom. Today it seems that there are no depths to which they will not go to mislead the people. Being the man on the spot in whom the people once laid their trust, he cannot consider himself to be a lotus, untouched by the mud and slime surrounding him. Whether he is strong or weak is beside the point. He remains fully responsible and accountable as the Prime Minister. He has tolerated the laggards, the incompetent and the corrupt. (see here) He is the leader, the “Sardar” of the entire pack and by tolerating them he becomes the most dishonest of them all. His own credibility now matches the credibility of CBI. As a leader, in which direction has he led the country so far and where is he now leading the country?

Those who countenance and exculpate him should understand that his actions on the scams are not of someone with the “supreme national interest” at heart. Rather, they are designed to serve the cause of the corrupt and protect private interests regardless of the cost to the people.

Comments in an earlier article in Prajatantra are worth repeating:
“In the reply to the debate on the Trust Vote on 22nd July 2008, the Prime Minister had said:

”When I look at the composition of the opportunistic group opposed to us, it is clear to me that the clash today is between two alternative visions of India’s future.”

Although the entire country has realized it by now, some day soon it will dawn upon Manmohan Singh too that actually it is he who, willy-nilly, is a part of the opportunistic group and his words will come to haunt him. After all, the truly opportunistic group is not one in the opposition, but one that manages to retain power by fair means or foul and whatever be the credentials of the parties forming the amalgam that is born out of compulsions to cling on to power.”

And it begs the question as to why is he continuing in spite of what has happened? He has already shown earlier that he is prepared to stand for what he thinks is right, as in the case of the nuclear deal. If the same willingness is absent in the current situation it can mean only this: that he does not stand for what is right or that he feels that what has happened was right. If he is continuing for the altruistic reason to serve the country, then he is doing the greatest disservice to the country. And why do the people accept the continuance of the Government either with or without him? Is it that if he or his government is not there the nation will collapse, or that we cannot afford elections at any cost even if it means that lacs of crores are lost and the mis-governance continues? The man who puts his government, his party and his party leader above the interests of the country is not fit to be called an honest man. He may not be corrupt but is he honest? Does dishonesty mean only making money? Is being allowed to continue as the Prime Minister not a kind of quid pro quo? The main qualification he has left now is his loyalty to a party leader whose own credibility too is fast eroding. Why should the people continue to countenance a Prime Minister just so he can continue to claim credit for being honest and continue to be loyal to someone? Going beyond him, why should the people tolerate a corrupt, incompetent government at all?

In trying to defend the indefensible, his veneer is peeling off, exposing himself as well as the vermin who have been hiding and thriving beneath the veneer of his integrity. The brand equity has been encashed and has now lost its value. He knows, he is aware but remains silent. His silence proves his acquiescence. The Silence of this Buddha, in words and in deeds, tells the whole story. Empty words like “Caeser’s wife must be above suspicion” do not carry any meaning any more except to invite further ridicule for Manmohan Singh.

Everything said, it IS quite sad to see an otherwise sincere person like him who could have done good for the country placed in this situation in trying to protect those who do not deserve it, for no one's personal interest can be above the country's interests. But it would not be fair if he alone has to suffer the ignominy of demitting office, his entire team must suffer the same fate and be ready to face the consequences of their collective failure.

Listen to this : Your browser does not support the audio element.

Manmohan Singh’s Genie- FDI in Retail

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 07:53:00 +0000

The Government is once again trying to resurrect its six year old proposal of allowing full fledged FDI in Retail which, Manmohan Singh and his team believe, is the magic genie that will solve problems that they are unable to solve themselves. The proposal is part of his Government’s unfinished agenda to submit the country to the full force of globalization in the so-called “enlightened national interest”. The disingenuous way in which the Government has been pushing this unconvincing case becomes evident by examining the course of events and its lame arguments advanced from time to time.

....and may be help with the naxal problem

Chronicle of the “FDI in Retail” Agenda

Considering the potential long term implications upon the entire structure of the retail trade which has been meeting the needs of 1.15 billion people, any Government believing in transparency would have taken the stakeholders in confidence in the first instance. At the outset, it should have published a Green Paper on the proposal with detailed analysis of pros and cons including details of evidences and data to support the claims of overwhelming benefits to the country that cannot be otherwise obtained but for FDI in Retail. Instead, it has been tossing around contrived justifications in an unstructured manner without any hard evidence to substantiate them, ignoring objections.

Within six months of the Manmohan Singh led Government assuming office, the Government made it known in November 2004 that it favored FDI in Retail. ( see here) It also got ICRIER to prepare a tailor-made “Study on FDI in Retail Sector- India 2005” obviously talking favorably of the benefits of FDI in Retail as the Government wanted. On cue, major global retailers like Walmart (USA), Carrefour (France) and Tesco (UK) began vigorous lobbying with pressures being brought also from their Governments. A gullible Government readily lapped up the stories of wonderfully-wonderful benefits as narrated by these retailers whose only interest was and is to secure a foothold in potentially the third or fourth largest market in the world for free. Members of Manmohan Singh’s Team became their virtual lobbyists pleading the case for FDI in Retail according to a given script, feeding to the public the arguments provided by the global retailers and other spin-doctors in a cut-and-paste manner.

Immediately after his visit to the USA primarily to discuss the Nuclear deal in July 2005 Manmohan Singh, presumably on prodding by the Bush administration and the Walmart lobby, got involved himself to persuade all concerned about the benefits. (see) In his address to the Joint Session of US Congress, he had said: We have to assuage the doubts and calm the fears that often arise when people face the impact of change. Many of the fears we have to address are exaggerated, but they must be addressed. – a comment alluding equally to the Nuke deal as also trade related measures like Retail trade liberalization. Due to stiff resistance from the Left Parties and the retail trade, he couldn’t deliver the policy change when Bush visited India in March 2006. However, to prove a point, a month before the visit, the Government allowed FDI in Single-brand Retailing, a measure which does not bring any tangible benefits, worthwhile or otherwise, for the country.

Considering the significance of the issue, the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Commerce took up in April 2007 an in-depth study Foreign as well as Domestic Investment in Retail Sector. In the meantime, in 2008 ICRIER also came out with another study on the Impact of Organized Retailing on the unorganized sector. The Parliamentary Committee comprising of members from all parties discussed the issues threadbare after considering the views of all concerned, including the ICRIER Reports. It tabled its Report in June 2009 which concluded that FDI in Retail should NOT be permitted. (see)

A few months later, in November 2009, Commerce Minister Anand Sharma said that there would be NO review of policy on FDI in Retail, just after the meeting of the Chairman of Walmart with him as well as the Prime Minister. (here) The denial was obviously only to make a show that the Government was standing firm against pressure from global retailers. Within just six months after the denial, ignoring the Parliamentary Report, the DIPP, Ministry of Commerce published on 6th July 2010 a so-called Discussion Paper on FDI in multi-brand retail inviting comments from the stakeholders and the public, SIX YEARS after the proposal was initiated. So, had anything changed? Yes, Manmohan Singh visited the US in late November 2009 and there is the impending visit of US President to India in November 2010. The Government is now desperate `to allow FDI in multi brand retail that will please the global players and, hopefully, earn a pat on the back from the US President for Manmohan Singh for being a champion of globalization.

That the DIPP Discussion Paper is merely a part of the charade and a formality is evident from the way in which leading questions have been cleverly drafted to elicit desired responses, a methodology routinely adopted by researchers to obtain answers that support the objective. From the dozen questions posed in the Paper, only half a question asks “Should FDI in multi brand retailing be permitted?” The entire remaining section is devoted to questions on the basis that FDI is going to be permitted. Another indication of the decision already having been taken was provided by the DIPP Secretary indicating that the issue was only related to decision as to the cap or the extent of FDI to be allowed.

There is no doubt that the decision to allow FDI in multi-brand retail has not only been taken but may be also known to retailers like Walmart and their Indian partners who are already talking of an aggressive store opening plan. (here) A similar statement has been made by Carrefour already. (here) The public would, of course, be the last to know, in line with the artful ways in which this Government works. The Government’s time table is already set. It would not wish to make the announcement while the Parliament is in session. But soon thereafter and well before Obama arrives in India in November 2010, the notification would be issued unless, of course, there is a strong resistance this time too from the political parties and other stakeholders.

If the case for FDI in Retail was indeed strong, the Government would not have been so opaque and furtive and would have satisfactorily met all objections long before now. Instead, it has adopted a devious approach and stratagem of going through a mock public debate at such a late stage based on mendacious justifications, for a decision already taken.

Liberally Global

Specious justifications

Almost all the tall claims of chimerical benefits from FDI in Retail advanced by the Government so far have been dealt with exhaustively in this and earlier articles in PRAJATANTRA to show that they are misrepresentative or downright bogus. Nevertheless, some relevant points need to be highlighted here.

India’s Foreign Exchange Reserves stand at $ 284 billion as on 30th July 2010. What is needed now is foreign investment in targeted high priority areas e.g. infrastructure, high technology manufacturing etc. and not in just any area. FDI in Retail is certainly not an absolute priority in the larger context. On the other hand, FDI is not flowing into areas of real priority to the extent expected despite a liberalized policy.
FDI in Retail should not be seen as a policy in isolation but a part of the larger global trade policy. Firstly, FDI in Retail trade is essentially market-seeking and rent-seeking FDI as opposed to resource-seeking or efficiency-seeking FDI. Pushed by saturated markets at home and pulled by growing markets and profits in countries such as India, the sole objective of global retailers is to expand their markets and profit opportunities. If at all foreign countries are allowed to participate in the enormous potential of one of the largest markets in the world by establishing just a retail base, there must be a sound basis and a matching quid pro quo. With no significant real benefits in relation to the country’s development objectives, allowing FDI in this sector is only to give a free access for free to foreign entities (by implication, countries) to our growing market. Therefore, it is a major bargaining tool which cannot be given away on a platter by a unilateral action. Secondly, a misleading argument has been advanced that even if the retail sector were to be unilaterally liberalized, no bindings would be undertaken in the WTO. This is not so. The change once introduced will be irreversible in its impacts internally and also once FDI is allowed, it would be hardly possible to retract the steps and effectively, it would bind the country. (please also see). If indeed its argument is valid, then the liberalization done earlier for wholesale cash-and-carry and single brand retailing need to be rescinded forthwith. In wholesale cash-and-carry trade allowed since many years, FDI to the extent of $1.7 bn. or just 1.54% of the total FDI has been received. FDI in single brand retail was permitted in January 2006. So far, till March 2010 the FDI received is $ 194 million or a measly 0.21% of the total. To date, there is no demonstrable beneficial fall-out which it was claimed could only accrue with liberalization. Therefore, the policy in both these areas needs to be cancelled immediately as it was unilateral according to the argument and has not yielded benefits.
Examples of various countries which have supposedly benefited from FDI in Retail have been cited by the Government. Each country has a different situation with regard to overall economic development, characteristics of manufacturing and retail sectors and business environment. It is irrelevant to cite examples of Chile, Mexico, Russia etc. with completely different economic and market structure and stage of development than India. There is enough material available to suggest in fact that the benefits claimed have not been realized even by countries which are listed. For example, experience in Mexico suggests that presence of global players does not always result in low prices. If at all the experience in some hand-picked countries may have been good, there may be other countries where the opposite results would have occurred. The example of China given in the paper is also completely misleading. Since many years it has become a manufacturing hub for mass-produced consumer products with a global market. China liberalized FDI in Retail primarily to comply with WTO when it had already developed a huge organized retail base of its own backed by a competitive manufacturing base. It is a $ 824 billion retail market and the largest domestic retailer Balian Group has sales of $ 14.4 billion – India is simply not comparable. Besides, the Government’s claim that FDI in Retail will achieve everything is straightaway demolished with the Chinese example because by no means can it be said that the growth of China’s consumption or development of retail sector or the back-end infrastructure or manufacturing base had anything to do with FDI in Retail being allowed there. It was the success of its overall policies that made this growth possible.
A justification advanced for FDI in Retail is that our consumption is growing. Well certainly, in a growing economy consumption is expected to grow. This should benefit the domestic entrepreneurs. Is growing consumption a valid reason for allowing global players to have a share in the pie?
It has also been suggested that somehow organized retail is always superior to our present retail structure. A deliberate confusion is then being created to equate FDI in Retail with Organized (large) Retail. Even if organized retail is assumed to be beneficial, this sector can and should develop with domestic resources in line with the needs of the consumers. It is simply dishonest to suggest that Organized Retail and global retailers are synonymous.
The government claim that the existing retail network of small retailers will not be greatly affected by the entry of global players is patently false. Even with the domestic organized retailers, small retailers will certainly suffer. Going by government’s own avowed objective, it wants to invite global retailers to compete with our own indigenous businesses and bring down prices. (see) In the light of this, such futile assertions of small retailers not being affected are meant only to fool the country. Consider that Walmart had sales of $ 405 billion in fiscal year 2010. Putting it differently, just this company singly has the bargaining muscle power while sourcing products, equal to 158% of the country’s total retail market estimated at Rs. 12,00,000 crores or $ 257 billion. Another company Carrefour had sales of $ 125 billion, nearly 50% of our total retail market. Only the naïve can believe that this bargaining power will not be used to squeeze suppliers or will not drive out smaller retailers with predatory prices. The dangers posed to our manufacturing sector do not appear to have even occurred to the Government. As global players, these firms procure from the cheapest sources world-wide. At present already hundreds of Chinese products are being imported albeit in relatively small quantities by local importers and sold in the retail at incredibly low prices. Even perishables like fruit are now being imported by local importers and they compete with our own produce. When more and more such products are imported into the country by the global players with their massive bargaining powers at still lower prices, it may well threaten even the manufacturers not only of consumer products but also consumer durables and farmers. The global retailers are only interested in leveraging their strengths and maximizing profits and will obtain their wares from the cheapest sources. Ironically, allowing global retailers also implies welcoming Chinese and other global suppliers of consumer products for whom the opportunity will be a godsend in getting a smooth entry point. They will be saved the hard work, time, uncertainty and risks of entering into the country on their own. The government seems to be oblivious of this implication.
The small and medium retailers would be affected in more ways than one. The global retailers would naturally invade the markets with the most potential i.e. the first and second tier cities, where real estate and retail store space are scarce. Even with expected augmentation, the cost of retail space will remain exorbitantly high for small retailers. Large organized domestic retailers are already competing with the small retailers for space and with the invasion of global retailers on the scene, retail space costs would further go up. It would become impossible for new small retailers to acquire retail space. In a short period of time, even the existing retailers would not find it worthwhile to continue to bear the high cost of their space and would be forced to shut shop. One ministry is brazenly suggesting that small retailers should become franchisees of the global retailers!
The claim that more jobs will be created is worthy of being trashed straightaway. When the economy is growing and wherever there is economic activity naturally jobs are created. Jobs will be created not just because FDI in retail is allowed. On the other hand, global retailers are likely to generate less employment for every million rupees in sales revenue than say, a small store. (see here)
The main palliative proposed by Government to placate the objectors is to place various restrictions on the global retailers, such as confining them to the larger cities, having minimum space requirements etc. Ironically, these are the precise restrictions they would not mind but even welcome, because they exactly fit into their plans. These retailers would naturally like to enter in the large urban markets with large retail space and not some small cities. Is any more proof necessary to show that the government is actually trying to help the global players in the name of protecting the domestic players? Other conditions proposed relate to setting up back end facilities such as cold chain etc. Again, the retailers are here to make profits for themselves not to do the job of others. If at all they set up any activity other than the front-end, they will do it only for their own requirements. It must be noted that once a foreign company operates as an Indian entity, there is no way to impose any discriminatory conditions on them. Even if that is possible, the conditions cannot be enforced and if they fail to fulfill them, in practical terms, they cannot be asked to pack up and go. The Government would not be so naïve as to think otherwise.
All the benefits which have been listed are in the end unverifiable as they cannot be directly correlated with the presence of FDI. Once the global retailers are in they are in and no one is going to verify whether the benefits they held out actually accrued or not and if not, nothing can be done about it.
Three of the benefits which the Government has suggested deserve particular mention as they show bankruptcy of thought as also an implicit admission of the failure of the policies of the Government.
The first is that with the entry of foreign retailers, government will be able to check tax evasion by local retailers. This is a completely anti-national argument and also denotes a brazen admission by the government of its failure in the discharge of its normal responsibilities to enforce its tax laws.
The second is that the entire back end supply chain infrastructure will suddenly develop and there will be large scale food processing, reduction of wastage, creation of warehousing and logistics facilities etc. and FDI will be an “efficient" means of addressing massive supply bottlenecks. Quite extraordinary and incredible assertion this! The retailers are primarily interested in their front-end operations unless the back-end operation is essential for its own purposes, as can be seen from a statement by the MD of Bharti Walmart recently that their primary interest (logically) is in front-end “in order to be able to monetize and see the final benefits of the supply we need to be able to serve our customers” (here) But that apart, this claim by the government is an admission that all its policies including liberalization of FDI in back-end activities, incentives for food processing etc. have failed and the Minister for Food Procesing S.K. Sahay is only good for releasing full page advertisements of his ministry showing pictures of his party boss at public expense.
A third assertion, the most bizarre, particularly coming from the Prime Minister no less, shows to what extent the Government is pushing the case for FDI in Retail. Speaking at a Conference of Chief Ministers recently, the Prime Minister batted for opening of the retail sector (meaning FDI) to check price rise! ( see here) What his Agriculture Minister has failed to do for such a long time, the PM thinks the global retailers will do. Such a wild assertion indicates that the government is probably unaware of what the real determinants of retail prices are, to expect that these retailers will be able to reduce the price levels in this vast country by just having shops in some urban areas. This is simply another proof that the Government has completely failed and is looking to external help and that too of multinationals to do what the government is supposed to do! This one single assertion by Manmohan Singh is enough for people to lose respect for his knowledge, understanding and ability to govern.
With these three arguments the government effectively implies that the Ministries and Ministers of Finance, Agriculture and Food Processing have lost their raison d’etre.

It is clear that the stage has not yet come for FDI in multi brand retail to be allowed under whatever conditions as to shareholding or any operating restrictions. The Government is simply putting the cart before the horse and trying to push “incompatible opening” using the expression in a study. Incompatible opening refers to “excessive” market liberalization not in tune with other changes in domestic structures – production as well as market related.

It is too tempting not to make a comparison with the past when Emperor Jehangir allowed East India Co. to set foot in India (see) or with the outsourcing of defense to the British by certain princely states.

Who says we must always learn from history?

Mercy Petitions - Just Not Justice

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 10:50:00 +0000

India the largest democracy in the world is governed by the Rule of Law. The Laws of the country provide for death penalty to be awarded for certain offences by following due process of law. As a safeguard to prevent undue harshness or occasional miscarriage of justice, the Constitution provides that a Mercy Petition could be made to the President of India (or Governor of State) for clemency in respect of punishment awarded by the judiciary. (A background article on Mercy Petitions related to capital punishment cases is given here)

A Mercy Petition is made after the arduous journey of a case through the judicial process right up to the Supreme Court. While the entire judicial process in its very nature takes a long time, there is little reason for decisions on Mercy Petitions to take an inordinate length of time.

Over the last nearly fifteen years, around 30 petitions for clemency have been made to the President. It was only after a discussion on Mercy Petitions gathered momentum in the wake of death penalty awarded on 6th May 2010 to Ajmal Kasab, one of the terrorists involved in the 26/11 terror attack on Mumbai that the public really became aware that virtually no decisions were being taken on petitions made for so many years earlier. A total of 27 petitions are understood to be pending at present either at the Home Ministry or the President’s Secretariat.

A review of the information that has been highlighted in the media in the last two months shows an apparently indifferent approach on a serious subject involving decisions by the highest constitutional authority, the President of India. It also shows how those in government who are supposed to deal with the matter resort to misleading the people and their insincerity in doing their duty to preserve the Rule of Law.

The focal role of the Home Ministry

The prime responsibility for making recommendations to the President lies on the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to whom the Petitions received by the President are referred. The Ministry is expected to deal with each petition expeditiously. For inexplicable reasons the Ministry takes many years to frame its recommendations to the President and its approach is best appreciated from the views of the Home Minister, on whose general or special directions the recommendations are finalized by the Judicial Division. Let us try to analyze the views of two successive Home Ministers in regard to the case of Afzal Guru. This is a case, which can be a classic case study, in which the indifferent or deliberately dilly-dallying approach of the concerned authorities is clearly visible. It is not an isolated case but is a typical and prime example.

Afzal was convicted in the Parliament attack case of 2001 and his death sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court in an appeal on Aug. 4, 2005. His wife filed a Mercy Petition on 4th Jan. 2006 before the President who sent it to the MHA on 4th Oct. 2006 for advice. His execution date fixed by the Sessions Court for 20th Oct. 2006 was stayed on the basis of the mercy petition. A curative petition subsequently filed in SC by him was disposed off on 12th January 2007. The progress of his petition may have caught the attention of everyone partly for having been politicized but mainly because he was sentenced in the Parliament attack case of 2001. For nearly four years, the Petition has been left undecided.

Shivraj Patil and Chidambaram

Shivraj Patil a miserable non-performer was the Home Minister for four and half years from May 2004 till Nov. 2008. His casual approach on Mercy Petitions like everything else becomes clear from his statements in the Parliament when agitated members raised the matter about the status of the Petition made on behalf of Afzal Guru. Responding in the matter in both houses on 12/13 Dec, 2006, on the eve of the anniversary of the Parliament attack, he almost gloated that no Mercy Petitions were decided before six to seven years, implying thereby that he was not under any obligation to speed up any process. In the Rajya Sabha he said:

"मगर मैं यह बताना चाहता हूँ, उस पर हमारे उधर बैठे हुए साथी उत्तेजित न हों, की हमने जो गए दस सालके आंकड़े निकाले हैं, उसको देखते हुए मैं आपको बताना चाहूँगा की कोई mercy petition छह साल, सात साल से पहले डिसाइड नहीं हुई है..."
(After having seen the figures for last ten years, I would like to inform you that no mercy petition has been decided before six years, seven years..)

Earlier, in Lok Sabha on 12th Dec. 2006 he had said:

"..उस चीज को ध्यान में लेना बहुत जरूरी है की एस प्रकार की जब एप्लीकेशंस, क्लेमेंसी पिटीशंस आती है तो सुप्रीम कोर्टने उसमें कहा है की अगर आप उसको क्षमा करेंगे तो भी सही ढंगसे नहीं करेंगे तो भी वे देखेंगे और क्षमा नहीं करेंगे और सही ढंगसे नहीं करेंगे तो भी देखेंगे. इस हालत में पूरी तरहसे जांच पड़ताल करके जो कदम उठाना जरूरी है वही उठाने को हमने सदन में एक नहीं अनेक दफा बताया गया है. "
(When such clemency petitions are received, it is very important to keep in view that the Supreme Court has said that if you grant clemency and do not do so properly, we shall review and if you do not grant clemency and do not do so properly, then also we shall review. In such a situation, whatever step has to be taken has to be done after full examination..)

It was a statement designed to make the people believe that the recommendations took time as the fear of a review by SC called for detailed study of the matter (but not otherwise). The power of SC to review a presidential decision on mercy petition is very limited and regardless of the power of the SC, a responsible government would, in any case, have to consider every matter carefully especially in a life-or-death matter. It cannot be cited as a reason for delay but was simply an attempt to obfuscate the issue.

Much later in May 2008 when asked about the petition, he went off on a tangent equating Afzal Guru’s case with that of Sarabjit Singh, an Indian in Pakistani prison retorting: “If you are asking for Afzal Guru's hanging, then how can you ask for pardon for Sarabjit Singh?" Here was the Home Minister suggesting that Afzal would have to be pardoned in exchange for the pardon of Sarabjit Singh. Then in August 2008, in an interview, he had placed the blame for the delay squarely on the Delhi Government.

Mercifully, Patil was forced to resign soon afterwards in November 2008 in the wake of the Mumbai Terror attack. Now, it is interesting to understand the thinking of the present Home Minister, Chidambaram on Mercy Petitions.

In an interview in April 2009, two responses by him on Mercy Petitions in general and Afzal Guru’s petition in particular are significant:

In one part he said: “In my view, remaining on death row is more severe punishment than suffering execution”. In response to a question of not fixing time limit for deciding mercy petitions, he said: “Because there is the larger issue that death penalty itself be replaced with life sentence without parole.”

These are extraordinary statements coming from a Home Minister which by implication suggest that the Government is perhaps, not in agreement with the law of the land and may be deliberately delaying decisions. Is it a design to frustrate unconstitutionally what the laws made by society and judgments pronounced by the courts ordain?

A few days thereafter on 15th April 2009, he gave a lame excuse just like his predecessor that “Mercy petitions in India are examined through well established procedures resulting in a delay in implementing death sentences”. Well, it goes without saying that the petitions would be examined everywhere, not only in India, through well established procedures but that certainly cannot take as much time as the judicial process. Interestingly, according to the Home Ministry, no written procedures exist.

But apart from the Afzal case, it is difficult not to conclude that the procedures are anything but objective or systematic even in other cases that come before it. Take the case of Govindasamy whose death sentence was confirmed by SC in 1998 and his Mercy Petition made in the same year was rejected in October 1999. It was resubmitted in June 2005. President Kalam, overreaching himself, accepted his plea in Sept. 2005 but Patil rejected the same as being devoid of any valid or new grounds and that there was no arbitrariness in disposal of mercy petitions. Finally, Chidambaram who once again recalled the file, recommended commutation to life sentence in October 2009, possibly under political pressure from Tamilnadu and Govindasamy’s sentence was commuted to life imprisonment in January 2010. At least 10 other Petitions have been recalled and resubmitted to the President more than once.

When Chidambaram took over, he had announced that all pending cases would be reviewed and resubmitted to the President. The repeated resubmission and reconsideration prima facie indicates either arbitrariness or uncertainty in the decision making or non-application of mind. Be that as it may, the delay in acting upon the petitions and in deciding whether they may be accepted or rejected is simply unconscionable.

Role of Delhi Government in Afzal’s case

Continuing with the case of Afzal Guru, the role of the Delhi Government specifically, the CM Sheila Dixit has, indeed been quite curious considering her casual behavior all along which shows utter disdain for public accountability.

The case was referred to the Delhi Government by MHA on 4th October 2006, asking for all records of the case as well as the Lt. Governor’s comments on the Petition. Between 4th Oct. 2006 and 28 Apr. 2010, the MHA sent 16 reminders to the Delhi Government (20 according to the Home Secretary) without receiving the comments. Even for furnishing the records related to the case – an administrative task requiring no application of mind – the Delhi Government took over three years to send these to the Home Ministry. The entire sequence of events clearly indicates that it was delay by design while the Delhi administration, particularly the CM continued to come up with unconvincing explanations or near lies to mislead the public.

Tejendra Khanna and Sheila Dixit

For example, on 18th Jan. 2007, the Delhi Chief Secretary Narayanswami said “Once the mercy petition is filed, the social aspect of the case gets increased. These are serious matters and we are taking into consideration the social aspect in the case”. He also said “such issues can not be wished away in a hurry”. Much later on 25th Sept. 2008, an indifferent Sheila Dixit said “We will reply to the MHA whenever the time is appropriate.” Two months back on 17th May 2010, when asked about a letter which the Ministry had sent to her Government, she said “I have not received any letter. Maybe the Home Department (of the Delhi government) received it”. Another galling statement the next day was “The letter goes from one department to the other. Neither the ministry writes it nor do I receive it. Moreover, that file has already gone”. On 21st May, Delhi Govt. sources hinted that the delay was due to the Commonwealth Games and it wanted to delay the response till the Games were over to ensure that the games went smoothly. Later, on 24th May Dixit said “I had said during the (Lok Sabha) election campaign last year that we have not cleared the file because it is a sensitive issue," She also attributed the delay in clearing the file to the opinions given on it by two Chief Secretaries of her government over two years back, in which they had supposedly raised the issue of law and order implications “if the execution is carried out here.” Pertinently, while one Chief Secretary had referred to the issue in his note in Dec. 2007, his successor had already since then said in January 2008 that “the government should ask for the Supreme Court’s verdict to be upheld”. Later, she said that, Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah also said that there could be law and order problem there if Guru was hanged knowing fully well that it is none of her business and that it is for MHA to take into account such views, if at all they are given. When it finally prepared the reply for the Lt. Governor’s approval, the Delhi Govt. said "implications of law and order may not be in Delhi particularly, but the overall picture needs to be kept in mind" a needless comment which prompted the Lt. Governor to seek clarifications before he finally sent out the comments to the MHA.

When on 6th June 2010 a question was posed to her if she was asked by Patil to keep the matter pending even if the Home Ministry sent frequent replies, she said “May be what you are thinking is true”. About there being political pressure, she said “'Political pressure was there and wasn't there. I cannot say anything more on this” This completely contradicts Patil who had placed the onus of delay squarely on her in an interview in August 2008 (see earlier). One of them is resorting to a complete lie or a half lie. Even if Patil had asked her to delay a reply, there were still five more reminders sent to her from 23rd January 2009 to 27th April 2010 long after he quit. This response in particular raises a very serious question about the functioning of both the Governments according to constitutional norms and this must be given close consideration. First, could Patil have advised Dixit to ignore official letters from his own Ministry when the Ministry was duty bound to get the comments of the State Government? Even if he did, could Dixit have, instead of protesting at the suggestion, meekly followed his advice at the risk of being accountable for failing in her own constitutional responsibility as CM? If either or both of them did any of this, the conclusion is inevitable that they would not have taken the risk of deliberately delaying the process without political direction of someone higher than both, but not the Prime Minister. This aspect needs to be inquired into closely.

Others in Central Government

Not only the Home Minister but also others including the Prime Minister have tried to obfuscate the fact of Government’s deliberate delays at least as far as Afzal’s case is concerned. On 24th Oct. 2006, a few weeks after the Petition was sent to the Home Ministry by the President, the Prime Minister had said "The legal process is on. The due process will be followed. Law will take its own course," Three and half years later, on 25th May 2010, on completion of the Government’s first year in office, he did not have anything more to say. “There is law of the land and legal processes should be allowed to have their course,” he replied in response to a question. In actual fact, the process of Mercy Petition under the Constitution begins when the legal process and legal rights have ended.

Adding his two bits worth, Home Secretary Pillai said on 23rd May 2010 "Afzal Guru is in the queue (of mercy petitions in the president's office). Nobody will be expedited," The question of jumping the queue would not simply arise if the earlier petitions were disposed off in time. Law & Justice Minister Moily said on 12th June 2010 “The law has to be addressed; the process has to be addressed. The process by which mercy petitions are dealt with has to be addressed as a system,” he said. “I am going to address those problems as a system.” Now, everyone knows what needs to be done and the question is simply: Why is it not done, whether in the case of Afzal or anyone of the other 28 petitions is the issue.

The President's Office

Even more unfathomable is the fact that the President’s Secretariat just sits on the Petitions where recommendations have been sent by the Ministry, by simply not acting upon them. There is a delay for no reason at all.

In the last 30 years 77 petitions have been disposed off by the President and only in 10 of these was the sentence commuted to life imprisonment. In last 15 years only 12 petitions were disposed off, of which only three were disposed off after January 1, 2004. Only in three cases was clemency granted. At present there are two petitions from 1998 and five which were made as early as 1999 but some of these were re-submitted more than once since. Based on the latest available details, a total of 29 petitions were pending with either the President’s office or the Ministry of Home Affairs of which, two were disposed off last month. The Ministry has claimed that as of now only the Afzal Petition is pending with them and three have been called back from the President, meaning that all other Petitions are with the President’s Secretariat after the MHA recommendations.

.

Four Presidents

Dr. Shankar Dayal Sharma, himself a Ph.D. in Law, President from 1992 to 1997, took care to dispose off Petitions submitted to him in time. In the time of his successor K. R. Narayanan till 2002, no Petition was cleared at all, except one, that of Govindasamy which was rejected as per the MHA advice. However, his execution was stayed at that time by the NDA government on pressure from DMK. This left 12 files for Dr. Abdul Kalam which number grew over time. He had referred 20 petitions which were already recommended for rejection to the UPA Government which assumed office in 2004 for possible review. The MHA stood by its earlier recommendations. Even thereafter, he reiterated his suggestion for showing mercy to all the convicts concerned with a note giving his own suggestions. During his time, only two petitions were cleared, that of Dhananjoy whose petition was rejected and he was hanged in 2004 and Kheraj Ram, whose sentence was commuted to life. With the petitions received during his tenure, the number of petitions pending till May 2010 stood at 29 involving 52 convicts. The present President since July 2007, Smt. Pratibha Patil, is not keen to reject any petitions at all and has only cleared only three petitions, one in 2009 and two in June 2010 where the sentences were commuted to life. In fact, in July 2009, she wanted to be apprised of the government’s stand on death penalty, especially in view of the large number of representations received from individuals and organizations such as the Amnesty International and the UNCHR for abolishing death penalty in the country. “Before she takes a view on the issue, she intends to hold discussions with the Prime Minister,” said a source in her Secretariat. But as long as the Government’s thinking is reflected in the MHA recommendations, the President cannot hold up decisions based on such considerations at all. A meeting by the Home Minister with her has also not changed the situation. In fact, the President had made it clear that while her predecessors were reluctant to reject mercy petitions, the onus of clearing the backlog is not upon her. A proposal by MHA to clear one petition every month has also not found favor. The PMO in a futile exercise had sought details of pending petitions as early as Sept. 2008.

The President is a creature of the Constitution. The Constitution is supreme and every Constitutional authority including the President is subservient to it. The President knows that in the discharge of his normal functions, he does not have to act on his own except in rare constitutional events related to formation or continuance of a government. His decision cannot be influenced by personal opinion or belief system as he is obliged to discharge his duties on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. If the Minister concerned advises that a petition should be accepted or rejected, he is bound to abide by the advice. The most he can do is to require the cabinet/minister to reconsider the same but is bound by the advice received after such reconsideration. It is also submitted that when the Constitution says that he shall act in accordance with such advice, it also implies that he is bound to take the required action and not sit on the advice. If such logical inference is not drawn then it would mean that in practice the President can simply frustrate any such advice simply by not acting upon it as is apparently being done now. It is submitted that not acting on an advice for no reason at all itself amounts to arbitrary action and can become the subject of a judicial review.

If the person occupying the position has any moral constraints, it is only fair that he does not choose to be President in the first place. It is extraordinary that now the President decides selectively not to act upon the advice received. It should be remembered that when a President rejects a mercy petition, firstly, it is not his personal decision but is based on the advice from the Minister and secondly but more importantly, he is not the one actually awarding the death penalty. The punishment has already been awarded by the judiciary. In rejecting the Petition, the President merely says that the petition is not deserving of mercy. There is, therefore, no cause for any moral dilemma on the part of the President.

Moreover, every matter that comes before the President as part of his normal function is of equal importance, whether it is legislation that has been passed or a recommendation in regard to a Mercy Petition and there is no reason for placing one matter in a bottom drawer or top drawer. All matters need to be treated with an even hand. It is expected that the President of the largest democracy is discriminating enough to understand the true role of his office in the entire process.

A Serious Issue

It has been held by the Supreme Court that the Court may consider whether there was undue delay in disposing off a mercy petition, whether the State was guilty of dilatory conduct and whether the delay was for no reason at all. The inordinate delay may be a significant if not the sole factor in considering whether a death sentence deserves to be commuted to a life sentence. If the effect of the procedures for dealing with Mercy Petitions is such as to enable those who have been given death sentences to claim commutation just by the default of the State, then it strikes at the very root of our Constitution and the system of jurisprudence. The power of clemency is expected to be utilized with great care and if an order is given in an arbitrary manner, it can become the subject of a judicial review. As things stand now, we are facing an unacceptable situation where the power appears to suffer from arbitrariness and capricious non-exercise or delay first with the Ministry and then with the President. Clearly, this is far removed from the Rule of Law that we want to swear by.

The larger issue deserving serious consideration is: Whether there is an unstated or implicit Policy of the State or a deliberate delay which frustrates the Rule of Law and overrides the Judicial Process by dealing with Mercy Petitions in a way that judicial decisions on death penalty are effectively negated? The provision for Mercy Petitions is made to take care of subjectivity and fallibility in the judiciary. But the procedure followed at present for considering them suggests that not only is this process subject to subjectivity and fallibility but also politics, whims and fancies and sweet will are added factors which may prevent true justice. It is emphasized that the issue is not about one particular petition which has acquired a rather disproportionate importance for the time being but it is about the larger context which relates to the general approach of constitutional authorities in dealing with Mercy Petitions.

It is neither fair to the judicial process nor does it provide justice – to the families of the victims and the society at large or the petitioner, in cases where mercy is deserved.

And finally

From 1997 onwards, till date there has been only one case in which capital punishment has been carried out i.e. Dhananjoy in 2004. While the people are discussing only the few cases where mercy petitions have been made, what happens to the over three hundred confirmed death penalty cases where the convicts are still not executed for years? Do the Governments at the Center and the concerned States not owe an explanation to the society as to why the sentences are not being carried out? Are the Governments simply abdicating their responsibility of executing the punishment awarded by the Courts in cases of capital punishment? If this situation remains, regardless of any rejections of mercy petitions, there would be little likelihood of these convicts ever receiving the punishment that justice provides for them. Can we then say that we have not the Rule but Misrule of law?

Living in the Shadow of Insecurity

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 20:20:00 +0000

Just when the people had begun to think that the Union Ministry of Home Affairs was seriously engaged in dealing with the naxal threat, the small sense of satisfaction was shattered on 6th April 2010 by the killing of as many as 76 professional men of the CRPF by the Maoists-naxals in Dantewada in the State of Chhattisgarh, one of the many hotbeds of naxal activities.

The relatively easy manner in which the moving forces were trapped, ambushed and killed like sitting ducks shocked the nation and even the Prime Minister and the Home Minister. Less than two months before, on 15th Feb. 2010 over 25 policemen were killed in an attack on their camp by Maoists in West Bengal.

This worst-yet attack on the security forces by the Maoists has once again shown the Government in poor light. The Dance of the Demons on 26th Nov. 2008 in Mumbai proved beyond doubt that the Government at that time was utterly incompetent to perform its normal function of ensuring the safety and security of the people from terrorist attacks from outside. Once again the specter of continuing insecurity is haunting the people, this time more particularly in relation to the increasing strength and spread of Maoist-naxal insurgents within. The capability of the Government in having a clear vision, developing a workable strategy and effectively executing it, is in serious doubt.

Everyone, from those directly concerned to experts to arm-chair advisers to the people at large are now engaged in thinking about what might have gone wrong, how the government strategy was faulty, poor leadership, how poorly motivated or trained the forces are, wrong intelligence, and what should be done now. Clearly, the task of tackling growing insurgency in large parts of the country where the writ of The State does not seem to run, is a matter of the deepest concern for all as it challenges the authority of the constitutional governments.

Many approaches have been suggested – long term, short term, heavy hand, hearts and minds, direct, outside-in or inside-out approach etc. Perhaps, the situation in each affected area would present unique ground realities which may require a specific response strategy and plan. There may be lessons to learn from the insurgency in other parts of the world such as Peru (Sendero Luminoso of Guzman). All these are serious issues the consideration of which must be left to the policy makers and experts within the goverment. What is undeniable is that the use of the regular army or the air force should be the very last resort (other than logistical support) because apart from the fact that their minds are trained for warfare of a different kind altogether, their use would seriously question the government's ability to deal with our internal problems. What is equally undeniable is that the forces must be properly trained and motivated and provided with the necessary weapons and wherewithal. Considering the growing influence of the naxals, it may even call for a force within the CRPF and the forces of the States, specifically trained for anti-naxal operations.

The most important issue that needs to be answered arising from this latest affront to our national cohesion is:

WHERE DOES THE BUCK STOP

When it became clear that the entire operation planned for an objective had gone wrong, the Minister of Home Affairs, Chidambaram, accepted moral responsibility and on his own offered to resign. In all probability, the resignation offer is just a public acknowledgement of the gravity of the event and not meant to be acted upon. This comes days after Chidambaram incurred the anger of the West Bengal Chief Minister for having told him that the buck for failure in dealing with naxal situations in West Bengal stopped with the latter.

But the latest event is not a pointer to who really is responsible. The prime responsibility for the constant fear of insecurity which the people feel and which, unfortunately, is even more strengthened by events such as Dantewada, is the total lack of seriousness of the UPA govt. led by Congress and absence of a clear view on terrorism and naxals for over five years. The casual approach, paralysis and paranoia of the previous UPA government are continuing to harm the country and will continue to do so for years to come.

The country is paying dearly for the absence of a clear view on terrorism by the UPA Government led by Congress. The benumbed response to terrorism and internal security issues in general over the last five years provided ample time and opportunity for the Maoists to get emboldened and get entrenched in newer areas as well.

While Chidambaram has accepted his moral responsibility, as he should, the person who really should be accountable but is not, is the Puppeteer Sonia Gandhi. In common perception, the lack of policy on terrorism was influenced largely by her paranoid but false fears of losing votes. Beyond that, the lady committed a cardinal blunder by nominating as Home Minister a thoroughly incompetent Shivraj Patil, purely on the basis of his sartorial foppery and blind loyalty to her family. In over four years of his continuance as the Home Minister, Patil excelled himself to achieve the distinction of being responsible for the darkest period in the internal security of the country. He proved himself to be the worst Home Minister in our history, much like another colleague from his home state, Sharad Pawar, who has distinguished himself as the worst Agriculture Minister ever. ( see here)

Chidambaram, who has mercifully been divested of the Finance Portfolio, is down to doing his job as the Home Minister with a commitment that was completely absent in his predecessor, Shivraj Patil. To what extent Chidambaram succeeds only time will tell but he is certainly not warming his chair like Sonia Gandhi’s nominee. That Patil submitted his resignation with reluctance and Chidambaram has done it on his own, speaks volumes about Patil. That he has since been given a gubernatorial position speaks volumes about Sonia Gandhi.

It is just as well that Chidambaram has accepted that the buck stops with him. Sonia Gandhi who must share the blame for the internal security situation as it developed over the last five years is basking in the false glory showered by her sycophants for the women’s reservation etc. Did she express one word of remorse or sympathy? No Sir, she is made of sterner stuff. She cannot be bothered with the safety and security of the people. She is concerned only with bouquets, not the buck, which must stop somewhere else.

AND FINALLY,

It cannot be said with any certainty that the entire Government is of one clear view on terrorism and naxalism. What, if any, is the stated policy of the Government on these two aspects must be clearly enunciated. And its implementation in right earnest must be there for all to see. Sadly, the Government has never appeared to be clear about its position as can be seen from the following full page advertisement that was released after the Dance of the Demons in November 2008.

The headlines scream :

LAND OF GANDHI CANNOT BE OVERWHELMED
(which Gandhi is meant? why not Mahatma Gandhi?)

It goes on to say:

No Force is Strong Enough to Challenge the Idea of India

And the meaningful lines:

The Mumbai Terror Attack Was an Audacious Assault on India’s Prestige and an Affront to its People.
Is this an advertisement by the terrorists proclaiming their success? May be something similar would have been conveyed to the motivators of the attack by the executors of the project after successfully achieving this objective!

Lastly:

INDIA SPEAKS IN ONE VOICE TO ISOLATE AND DEFEAT TERROR

This is a prime example of an advertisement with utterly mindless content and without realising the import of what message was being conveyed. The main objective, of course, was to somehow show the face of Sonia Gandhi centrestage in a Government Advertisement at public expense of over one crore rupees.

If the views of those in Government have not changed much, the people may see another advertisement shortly, at least half page, as visualized below.

May the People Keep Eternal Vigil Themselves!

Have a Bt Brinjal a Day - Part II

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 10:23:00 +0000

Contd. from Part I here

Concluding Part II

Fair & Lovely?

Regulations, Monitoring, Control ….Labeling Lollipops

It has been suggested that after the products are approved they should be subject to rigorous regulations, monitoring and control. Does such a regime seem feasible? It can only be talked about not practiced. Taking the specific situation of our country with millions of farmers, a long supply chain and logistics issues, regulations will be on paper and any effort to seriously implement, monitor and control would only lead to creating a costly maze of machinery which will keep chasing the goose. Once the genie is let loose, he will break the lamp from where he came and do what it wants, freed from his master. This is all the more so because the master does not know enough about the genie in the first place and the harm that can be caused is unpredictable and will be unexpected.

Even independent verification of data submitted by the applicant entities would serve little purpose because that again would be based on existing protocols which do not take into consideration the very real apprehensions about unforeseen events once the products enter the food chain. The real danger is that of one or more unexpected, uncontrollable events, which cannot be ignored.

It is also suggested that no GM foods should be introduced till there is a labeling regulation in place so that people can make informed choices. If the government is determined to proceed with the introduction, it may well propose to evolve strict labeling laws to silence such objectors. Will that do? Emphatically not. Labeling of GM foods is good only for intellectual discussions. It is an impossible and meaningless idea and once a GM product enters the food chain at the farm level, there is no way to label the food to achieve the so-called choice. Talking of labeling even imported packed processed foods for example, is a sheer absurdity and has no relevance in our country. It will simply provide a ruse to the Government to allow GM foods. Apart from not being capable of meaningful control, such labels would not make any sense for the average consumer except the intellectuals making the suggestion.

No, the issue needs to be stopped only at the threshold. That is the only time and place to make an “informed choice”. Once it has crossed the threshold, it would be impossible to stop it. It would not make sense to first invite a wild beast to enter, roam free and then try to lasso the beast and its progeny – an impossible task.

Case by Case Consideration

To offer a palliative, it has been highlighted that the approval would be on a case by case basis and so if the specific Bt Brinjal is approved now, it does not mean that new products can automatically enter the environment. What is wrong with this logic? A lot. As anyone used to the way in which a government works, precedent is what is important. Once a precedent is established, regardless of case by case consideration, essentially the same principles as well as procedures would have to be followed unless there are completely new situations. Once Bt Brinjal comes in, it will be quickly followed by corn, Jowar(Sorghum), rice, Okra and others. There are 25 kinds of rice, 23 kinds of tomatoes, groundnut, pigeon peas, potato, mustard, sugarcane, soya etc. awaiting GEAC approval. Before long, millions of farmers would become dependent on GM seeds forever.

The only Option?

An impression is being carefully and systematically created that GM foods is the only way to feed the people. The idea at once sounds attractive to Governments and the people because everyone is worried about food. The agriculture mismanagement places a tremendous extra psychological pressure on the Government to clutch at straws that are easier and convenient to catch.

Going by what the experts say, GM foods are not the only option at all to alleviate our food needs. In fact, the world can well do without them. If the Government was really serious about providing food why have they still not taken any major steps to aggressively push totally non-controversial logical actions like creation of storage and logistics infrastructure which would substantially reduce the massive losses across the board not just in one specific product like Brinjal? It is known that there are effective ways of pest management available. Even taking the case of Brinjal, see here and here. Why have the agriculture extension scientists failed to train farmers in such pest management, optimal use of pesticides and other productivity improving methods? What innovations have been done in our research laboratories that waste billions of rupees, other than reproducing experiments done in other countries and developing countless hybrids that do not have the taste and flavour of the foods any more? After over 50 years of five year plans, is the country so totally crippled in agriculture that it has to now learn to run with untested crutches? And, does it mean that without GM foods, hunger and death are an inevitability for our people?

The only sensible question worth trillions of dollars and our food sovereignty which needs to be asked and answered is:

IF GM technology did not exist or if it was already proved to be harmful, what would the Government have done? Worse, if later on it is conclusively found that the GM foods are not desirable, what would we do?

If there is an intelligent answer, well then, that is what the country should be doing now.

Wider Implication of approval

If the GM food is approved at this stage by a weak-willed Goverment under pressure, there is a much wider implication way beyond the country. If a country of 1.2 billion people allows GM foods, it would be the best endorsement for those involved in the business of promoting GM foods and would be effectively used to break down the resistance of other countries much as is being done now by telling India about the "worldwide" acceptance.

Larger issues of Public Policy

Apart from the specifics, there are much larger issues which have profound and serious implications for Public Policy and even the future of our Independence which would be beyond the capacity of those who are pushing for the GM foods to decide.

First, whether the Government has the right to force-feed the people with products whose effects on their health it does not know for sure? More seriously is the Government competent to bind future generations to live with any ill-effects of allowing foods produced by interfering with fundamental rules of nature? As already discussed above, regardless of any labeling, in effect and in practice the people will simply not be able to exercise their freedom of choice once the product enters the food chain. It would amount to force feeding them.

Secondly, the long term strategic and wider implications of allowing this genie must be considered. In the theory of Globalization that our Prime Minister has been practicing goaded by the developed economies for their own gains, we are inexorably moving towards a situation where right from the first link in the supply chain (agriculture) to the final link (retail), the country is opening its doors to potential domination by the likes of Monsanto and Walmart (see articles on FDI in Retail). The implications of this proposition, even if it may sound far-fetched or alarmist, can be ignored only at our peril. Particularly in the case of GM foods, allowing a producer to release a product is to ensure for him a virtual monopoly because unlike any other consumer product, every new intending producer of a similar GM food will have to undergo the same testing and approval regime, apart from intellectual property issues. At this stage, it is not known whether a farmer using “A” GM seed could at will switch to “B” GM seed. There is also need to be certain that the GM seeds would not have inbuilt mechanisms (like the Terminator gene) which would make it imperative for the farmers to keep buying new seeds each time.

Knowing how this Government has been implementing policies by a ham-handed approach and manipulation of public opinion rather than by transparency, it is hard to trust that its actions will always be solely guided by public interest. Two examples of its devious ways of working are the introduction of iodized salt (see here) and FDI in Retail. Anything that the Government is determined to do becomes an action in public interest and supreme national interest and no one can raise a question.

It is really a question whether the Government itself has the competence to decide on this vital issue that impinges upon the freedom of the people and the very sovereignty of the country. It is submitted that it cannot be done without a specific mandate from the people. If it is really convinced about the justification, let it go before the people and seek such mandate.

What should be done?

The Government by now has the benefit of all views and should know the high level of concern that exists in India as well as "worldwide". Unless it simply chooses to erase all objections from its mind, the only course open to it is the sensible suggestion for once made by the previous Health Minister Ramadoss and simply defer a decision for five or more years. That will also provide clarity to all concerned. Any other view could spell unpredictable consequences for health, environment and impinge on the food sovereignty of the country. That, would be unacceptable.

Successors to Jehangir and the East India Company

Jehangir may be forgiven for allowing benign looking foreign traders with a shipful of gifts to set foot in the country and start equally benign sounding trading activity (factory), because he did not have history to guide him.(see here) But the present Government and the people know enough of History, our own and that of others, and if we fail to learn, we have ourselves to blame for being an Independent nation only by label.

Select references:

Constitution of Expert Committee

Bt Brinjal Primer
Expert Committee II Report
GEAC Decision 14.10.2009
Statements by Scientists
Highway to genetic holocaust
Pawar view
Jairam Ramesh view
Report from Orissa
BBC Report 1999
Finding the Tipping Point
Bt Brinjal a step towards disaster
Prof. Seralini’s comments
Dept. of Biotechnology Brief on Brinjal
Patent application on Bt Brinjal
Prof. Kershen Letter
Do we need Bt Brinjal
Letter by Prof. Schubert, Salk Institute
Statements by GEAC member
How BT Brinjal was cleared
All Mahyco’s Men
Brinjal Pest Management
Brinjal Pest Management II
Prof. Seralini Talk
CSA Briefing
Who Benefits from GM Crops 2006 Report
Who Benefits from GM Crops 2009 Report
Does the world need GM foods
GM Food – Myth and Reality
Force feeding of Iodized salt
FDI in Retail – contrived justifications
FDI in Retail - Charade
Successors to Jehangir

It is time for the People to speak up

Have a Bt Brinjal a Day - Part I

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:48:00 +0000

This article is about GM foods, an issue of crucial importance for the people and in attempting to analyze the same in some detail, it has ended up being somewhat long. It is presented in two parts.

Part I

An unprecedented and furious debate has been raging due to the imminent introduction in India of the first GM food, Bt Brinjal which was recently recommended for release by the official Genetic Engineering Approval Committee, GEAC (aptly mentioned in a government memorandum as Genetic Approval Engineering Committee – a Committee to engineer approvals).
see here.

But the GM foods (termed Frankenfoods by many) controversy was not born then. Brinjal transformation in India was initiated as early as 2000. Prior to that the initiation of Bt Cotton started with approval for import of transgenic seeds in 1995 and the release of Bt Cotton was finally approved in 2002. Grave concerns have been and are continuing to be raised all over the world about GM agricultural products all through their journey for nearly two decades.

The concerns being raised have so far not being satisfactorily addressed and the Government appears determined to allow the first GM food into the food chain.

The main issues, about which people are and ought to be concerned, are: Ethical, Health and Environment and larger issues of Public Policy.

Leaving the much larger ethical issue aside, although it deserves to be debated, it is critical to examine the other two issues in detail as this first approval or rejection may be a momentous decision for the country and for the people in the present time and the future generations. For this reason, the people should be involved and engaged in this discussion, not merely shrug it off by accepting whatever the advocates of the GM foods or the Government dish out. For a broad idea of the specific issue of Bt Brinjal, it is useful to refer to this publication by the Ministry of Environment & Forests.

"I should not be blamed then for the price rise"A Brinjal of Contention

Immediately after the GEAC recommendation was made on 14.10.2009, the groundswell of protests gained momentum following which the Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh announced holding consultations with all interests before taking a decision. With his public hearings still underway, Pawar reportedly objected saying that the GEAC approval was final and the central government did not have any say in the issue. see here . By experience, people know by now that utterances of Pawar are best ignored when it comes to judging public interest as opposed to private interest. Jairam rightly opposed his stand. Even the GEAC had said “Since this decision of the GEAC will have major policy implications, the GEAC decided to forward the recommendations and report of the Expert Committee….to the Government for a final view”. (Here)

The issue does have great public policy significance and cannot be confined to the scientists alone. Scientists like everyone else, know what they know and do not know what they do not know. They are not omniscient. Even when totally objective, whatever they say is based upon only the present state of their knowledge. They try to stretch the frontiers of knowledge all the time. That is how knowledge grows. They may also try to create something novel based on that knowledge.

Whether they claim ability to clone sheep or pigs or politicians with desirable characteristics, it is for the society to draw up their limits based on ethics and plain good sense and whatever they come up with by remaining within those limits, decide what is acceptable and what must be rejected. A very simple but related example is that of Basmati Rice. Scientists at Pusa Institute developed a hybrid closely resembling the premium pure Basmati minus its flavor. The scientists proved that they could do something like that but the new Evolved Basmati should have remained in their labs. Instead, it was released in the market. Who benefited? It benefited the adulterers for whom it is an ideal adulterant. Major importing countries were forced to evolve strict standards and even DNA based methods to check the adulterated Basmati. But the Indian consumer continues to pay a high price for a highly adulterated product happily believing it to be pure Basmati. Did it benefit the Basmati farmer or the consumer? No. Is any regulation and control working? No.

The mind of the Government is already made up

The public consultations may well be a mere charade to give the appearance of taking a balanced view for a decision that is already made elsewhere and balance already tilted on one side. The Government is known to work in this manner. The Prime Minister has hinted at an imminent positive decision stressing only on “appropriate regulatory control based on strictly scientific criteria”. (see here) Clearly he and his ministers know what the decision must be.

If the Government really wanted to have an informed debate involving the people on this crucial issue, it should have published long back a Green Paper. Rather than wasting 100s of crores of rupees from public funds on advertisements for promotion of politicians and announcing inauguration of minor events, it should have undertaken a major advertisement campaign fairly and transparently placing before the people the issues and the views of both the sides of the debate without giving out its own comments as it has done at this late stage by means of the Primer which is still not available widely. Obviously the people are just guinea pigs. How can it be believed that it genuinely wants to consider the views of the people?

Commercial Interests

Those who object to GM foods are also concerned about the fact that the entire movement for GM foods appears to be strongly driven by global commercial entities whose record is far from clean and who are the real beneficiaries at the cost of the supposed beneficiaries. See the reports here and here .

In a recent news report, it has also been suggested that some members of the GEAC may be favourably disposed towards the entity whose Bt Brinjal is being considered. see

For every global business, India and China are the new frontiers to be attacked and conquered for their businesses to grow. This is true of agricultural inputs too and it is but logical that the companies involved in GM foods are vigorously pursuing entry into this market. In the light of our eagerness to embrace globalization we have demonstrated that we do not have the will to resist pressures for long and if the will exists, it is not impossible to weaken it by various means.

If the likes of Walmart having a plain retail business can lobby to enter into India, Monsanto can hardly be blamed for trying to sell their technology based product. Such interested parties have been extolling the virtues of their offerings from Retail trade to Branded Consumer products to GM foods and the Government has been lapping up their exaggerated claims and placing cut-and-paste copies before the people. The same arguments –“farmers will benefit”, “consumers will benefit” - applied for FDI in Retail are also being applied to GM foods. See here and here.

Like all good salesmen whether they sell wonder wash detergent or magical weight loss program or double-your-money scheme, they will exaggerate to a point where customers will feel left out if they do not buy. Ultimately, it is left to the sanity and good sense of governments and the people to separate the chaff from the wheat. It would not be far fetched to say that especially in the case of GM foods, it is akin to a pusher tempting a potential customer for drugs which would lead to dependency. Caveat emptor – let the buyer beware.

Wonderful things GM foods will do

These salesmen claim that GM foods will dramatically reduce insecticide use, increase yield, faster growth, impart beneficial properties etc. The claims are limited only by the seller’s inventive genius. E.g.
- Food that can deliver vaccines- banana that can produce Hepatitis B vaccine (why??)
- Perhaps, Apple with the texture of jelly, taste of Jackfruit and shape of a beer can?

What Bt Brinjal involves

Brinjal is a plant native to India and is produced in India for over 4000 years. The country produces over 9.6 million tons of Brinjal annually with the top four producing States being West Bengal (29%), Orissa (20%), Bihar (12%) and Gujarat (10%) accounting for over 70% of the total. Apart from other pests, the main pest that attacks Brinjal is the Fruit and Shoot Borer (FSB). The Bt Brinjal variety is specifically developed to control the FSB which develops inside the fruit making it difficult to control it except with precisely timed pesticide application before it reaches the inside.

Bt Brinjal is a transgenic product made by inserting the toxin Cry1AC from bacterium B. Thuringiensis into Brinjal to induce resistance specifically to FSB. It is like the toxin getting under the skin of Brinjal and acting as toxin for the FSB resulting in its death. It would appear that the dead FSB would still remain within the fruit. Further, to an average person, it would seem that once the toxin is inside the fruit (even as a protein), it would logically remain there and get into the human body when it is consumed. It is also known that the pests develop resistance to pesticides over time, but it is claimed that in case of Bt toxin within the fruit, no such resistance would be developed. The scientists have tried to explain the issue and it is best left to the experts to agree or disagree on the same. But it does alter the genetic pattern of the food which has been developed over millennia.
The Expert Committee II has also included in its Report quantification of the economic benefits due to usage of Bt Brinjal. It is not clear whether the higher seed cost has been offset. But the point to note in all such benefit estimates is that they may be exaggerated and even if accepted at face value, once the product is commercialized, there is no way to ensure that such benefits continue to accrue over a period. They may well disapper over time.
Gene, the genie

Health and Environment issues

Many issues have been raised by experts and NGOs on health and environment related issues not only of Bt Brinjal but also GM foods per se. The objections are not peripheral but substantial and far from being emotional. It is not mere scaremongering. If the GM food advocates want scientists’ views to be respected, so also should the opposing views from scientists be respected. The fact that there is an overwhelming body of objectors, distinguished scientists and academicians themselves and with no apparent vested interest to oppose GM foods lends significant credence to the arguments of those who protest against GM foods. Just one article will indicate the status of the objectors and what they have to say. See Statements by Scientists. Also see: Highway to genetic holocaust and a Letter from Prof. Schubert of the highly respected Salk Institute. (More references are given at the end of this article and may be referred to.)

The Expert Committee Report does seem to have considered in detail the findings on the large scale tests and also tried to respond to many of the questions raised about the findings, including the points of Prof. Seralini (see here) and Dr. P. Bhargava, (an invitee as directed by the Supreme Court), on whom some are placing reliance to voice their own objections.

But there are aspects related to the EC II Report and the GEAC meeting at which the same was approved, which raise concern about the way in which the matter has been gone about (engineered?)

1. Decision of GEAC was hurriedly taken within just 6 days of submission of the EC II Report.

2. Absence of Health Ministry representative in GEAC meeting. It is known that the previous Health Minister had objected to the introduction of GM foods by writing to the Prime Minister. Although he was part of the EC-II which reviewed the findings, the GEAC meeting was for a higher purpose. No leave of absence of absentees has been noted in the GEAC meeting.
3. It is accepted that Brinjal has its origin in India. see a Ministry Document and also see a Patent application on Bt Brinjal as also the position of National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety has provisions that discourage genetic modification of crops in their land of origin. Apparently in order to get around this provision, the EC-II cited references just to show that there was no certainty about the origin of Brinjal.
4. CFTRI representative on the GEAC had suggested to test the Bt Brinjal for flavour which is an essential element of any food item apart from taste, texture, cooking quality and composition, Inexplicably, CFTRI refused to do the test on transgenic food. The EC-II decided to ignore this saying that the test was not required. This may be strictly true but doubts remain about the issue.
5. EC-II has noted that “Adoption of transgenic crops engineered primarily using the cry proteins to prevent damage caused by insect pests has given excellent results in cotton and maize worldwide resulting in significant economic benefits. A similar approach in brinjal is expected to provide substantial benefits to farmers.” The term “worldwide” has been freely used in the Report to suggest that if the entire world is accepting it (false), India must do it too. The term “worldwide” is designed to mislead. By far the main production is confined to the American Continent with USA being the biggest. In the USA itself, GM crop production actually increased pesticide use by more than 4 percent between 1996 and 2004 (see here) It is more true that there is a worldwide disagreement on the need and desirability of GM products.
6. The GEAC opined that the cry1Ac gene incorporated in Bt brinjal event EE-1 is 100% identical to the one expressed in Bt cotton event MON-531 approved in India and globally. The fact is that the same is approved in the case of cotton and more important, the term “globally” is used to show as if Bt Cotton is grown all over the world which is not so.
7. How bt brinjal was cleared ( see here)
8. EC-II has rightly focused only on the prescribed tests saying that Regulatory mechanism is a dynamic process which is continuously updated based on scientific developments and evidences. But in the first place,there are doubts about the initial parameters set for the tests. The fact that decisions are based on these tests also shows that if subsequent evidence raises serious issues, it would be too late to correct the situation. This becomes important precisely because the discussion relates to products entering the food chain. Science is replete with examples, starting with DDT and now encompassing even the later-day pesticides, of how inventions hailed as panacea are now recognized as harmful by the very scientists who might have once promoted them enthusiastically and unreservedly.
9. The scientists making the recommendations have already given enough caveats to make it clear that they are basing their decisions on the tests as prescribed, on the findings as presented and on the basis of existing knowledge. See this: “Our collective wisdom is limited on recombinant technology. Therefore, we are treading carefully. Decisions have been based on current evidence in science. But, we must have a system of post-marketing surveillance to assess health impacts,” and “Brinjal is not a staple food for anybody. Unless the (GM) product is in use, how can we say? What will happen in the future is anybody’s guess” a member of GEAC expert committee, Vasantha Muthuswamy, said. In any case, she said, “the Bt gene may already have become a part of the food chain, as Bt cotton cakes are being used in animal feed and fodder.” (see here) Such remarks ring loud alarm bells and confirm that the scientists simply do not know enough at this stage and they would like the products to be first released in the food chain. It also shows that the Government approved Bt Cotton earlier without even considering that the product could enter the food chain. It would be reckless to repeat the same for an item of direct use without regard for the real fears and apprehensions already expressed by other equally or more knowledgeable scientists.

While the scientists may have kept escape clauses, the Government has a higher responsibility. It cannot simply say that they relied on what the scientists said and agreed to release. If anything goes wrong, who will take the responsibility and be there to face the consequences? This Government and the Ministers?

Bizzare Arguments

To push the case for GM foods, some really bizarre arguments have been used. For example:
a. EC-II, while rejecting the need for additional tests proposed by Dr. Bhargava, invitee at the instance of the Supreme Court, said “Raising the bar of the regulatory process based on hypothetical concerns and apprehensions would be highly detrimental for research and development in the area of agricultural biotechnology especially for public sector institutions.” It is an outrageous suggestion that just because research is done by a public sector institution it should be spared rigorous requirement even where human health and environment concerns so demand.
b. Another advocate from abroad one Prof. Kershen has written to the Environment Minister giving some bizzare arguments including “By failing to approve the commercial cultivation of Bt brinjal, India runs the very strong risk of discouraging agricultural research and development. India needs and deserves agricultural research and development from its scientists to reduce poverty and to remain competitive. But they cannot provide that research and development if their efforts are thwarted. ” (see here) Does this mean that the products need to be approved just to make the scientists happy?? No true researcher or scientist gets discouraged if his efforts do not yield fruit because that is inbuilt in the nature of his work, nor does any business get discouraged if one of its ventures fails. And why is HE pleading for scientists of a private entity? To present such an argument is to insult the intelligence of the Minister. The Professor says that he has been following the matter closely since 2000. The contents of his letter are enough to suggest that vested interests may be involved. Even assuming that it is not so, the arguments are worth ignoring.

(contd.)

see Part II here

It is time for the People to speak up

Unashamed Hypocrisy

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:33:00 +0000

Message is important

When Krishna Tirath, the Minister for Women & Child Development, allowed a picture of a retired Pakistan Air Force Officer to find its way in an advertisement released by her Ministry, she joined the select band of goofers in Manmohan Singh’s Government. See here

It was a grave blunder arising from sheer negligence which caused serious embarrassment to the Government. But all she was really trying to do was to remain in the good books of her boss - no not the PM, but Madame Soniaji - by placing her picture in the Ministry’s advertisement. She was hoping that the advertisement, released in the name of the “National Girl Child Day” would catch the eye of Soniaji as she read the morning newspaper and would show that Tirath was doing her job well by placing her picture in the advertisement. The appearance of the Pakistan officer spoiled her party.

When Tirath found herself at the receiving end after the blunder came to light, she defended the advertisement saying: “The message is more important than the image. The photograph is only symbolic.” What is the message that the advertisement displays? Its punch line says “Where would you be if your mother was not allowed to be born?” Where, indeed! It is no use trying to scratch one’s head or any other part of the body trying to find an answer. It is an absurdly idiotic line which is as senseless as the Minister’s assertion. It would be easier to get the answer by posing that very same question to the Minister herself. The advertisement was sent by the Ministry to the DAVP on 22nd and the DAVP, for some strange reason (perhaps to get over authority limits per ad) issued three different release orders the next day for releasing the advertisement in just one newspaper, Times of India, Delhi edition, on the 24th January. As Soniaji lives in Delhi and reads the Times of India, it is natural that the Girl Child issue becomes relevant only for Delhi. The message can thus be conveyed with minimal cost by selecting the right newspaper in Delhi.

Rough layout (may be?)

Pleasing Madame at Public Expense - No Holds Barred

It is, therefore, clear that the real “message” was to show Sonia Gandhi in an advertisement related to her Ministry and win the former’s approval. It is also clear that the entire advertisement was created by her staff (read the Minister) with in-house talent and she could not be bothered what pictures and what matter were included as long as the picture of Madame Gandhi was there. It is to her credit that she did not spend millions of rupees in one advertisement for the same purpose, as the others do.

Mad Scramble to Please

Minister after Minister has been trying to scramble to please Sonia Gandhi by grabbing opportunities to release huge advertisements by their Ministries where they could show her picture. Billions of rupees are being spent on such advertisements. No occasion or opportunity is insignificant enough and if there is no such opportunity, one can always be invented for announcing inauguration of some project or the other or publishing some inane messages in the name of this special day or that. Let it be clear. The content in the advertisements, the pictures of other individuals and visuals are all merely used as props, symbols, embellishments and fillers to fool the people and give the advertisements some legitimacy. The objective of these myrmidons is essentially only one: To show the picture of Sonia Gandhi and along with her, of themselves to promote their image.

More Shocking Abuse of Authority

More serious is the action of the Minister who seems to have recently outdone all others in his bid to become a greater sycophant than the others. That Minister is Kamal Nath. As the Commerce Minister earlier, he relentlessly pursued the agenda of the global retailers and multinationals of allowing FDI in Retail the purpose of which is only to allow these multinationals to make their billions in perpetuity from the Indian customer without bringing anything of value to the country. (see a series of articles here). He did manage to allow FDI in single brand retail – with very little justification from the country’s point of view. Much against his liking, he was replaced in the Commerce Ministry by a junior Anand Sharma and he has been given the Road Transport & Highways Ministry where he has not been able to do much.

Innovative ideas

Now, to get into the good books of Madame, in a shameless show of sycophancy carried out at public expense or by using public assets, he has devised a plan through NHAI to erect 1500 billboards all over the national highways showing pictures of primarily Sonia Gandhi and incidentally Manmohan Singh. This is estimated to cost over Rs. 100 crores. (see here) It is the most audacious and blatant misuse of power so far to promote and perpetuate the image of Sonia Gandhi. The flippant and irresponsible Minister with no sense of shame says: “These billboards are more a way of providing information to public than putting photographs.” If these are a way of providing information, where is the need or justification of putting up any photographs at all, whether of Sonia Gandhi or the Prime Minister or any of Kamal Nath’s friends or relatives for that matter? Going by this totally perverse logic, as long as some information is provided for the public, it would be justified to include pictures or names of any individuals like Sonia Gandhi or anyone that a Minister likes (see imaginary examples above). They are further trying to justify this repugnant action by saying that the money for the same would be spent by private contractors who will also maintain the same. The original proposal was indeed for the NHAI to spend its own money but this devise was worked out after the Planning Commission flatly declined to allow NHAI to do so. What do the private contractors have to gain from spending their own money? Such an explanation itself shows the audacity of the Minister in simply taking the people and everyone in Government for granted.

Gross Plunder of Public Exchequer

Can such gross abuse of authority ever be considered legitimate? No one can use the tax payers’ money or use public assets for promoting a private individual which Sonia Gandhi undoubtedly is because she is not in Government. “Chairperson of UPA” is just a cloak to fool the people into believing that it is an official position. It is even not proper to show the picture of any Minister because the programs are official government programs.

Whether the Madame approves?

We must practice austerity (but if we are spending anyways..)

Sonia Gandhi apparently does not believe that the people are thoroughly disgusted seeing her picture practically every day staring at them and taking credit for what the government is doing. Whatever is done by the Government is its constitutional responsibility and is supposed to be done by any welfare government. It is not done as she ordains. But as her cohorts obligingly place her picture in the advertisements and now even on other public assets; far from being really concerned she is seemingly enjoying seeing her picture every morning.

Mirror, Mirror....

In the matter of the highways billboards, for example, a cleverly worded report was let out saying that she “was not keen to have her photographs on highway billboards”. She is supposed to have written a letter to Kamal Nath asking him to drop the photographs. (see here) It is evident that this is a fake exercise only for public consumption. If she was really of that mind, there was no need to write a letter, a phone call would have put a stop to this hare brained idea of the Doon School product. By merely writing the “confidential” letter and making the fact known to the media, she has only tried to make a mock display of morality as her toady tries to make a mockery of morality. Secondly, she has been seeing her picture being used in the advertisements almost daily, assuming she at least glances at the newspapers if only to see her picture. She has not told anyone to stop such wasteful expenditure or at least not to show her picture. While talking of austerity (also see here), she has been simply grabbing all the publicity at the taxpayers’ expense.

She has clearly shown herself to be free-publicity hungry and an inveterate pretender claiming to have high morals. The Ministers are mere spouts; she is the fountainhead as far as this blatant misuse is concerned.

Now what?

If the Prime Minister and his Finance Minister have any claim to promoting public accountability and if they stand for what is right, let them decide from whom the expenditure on promotion of individuals by such devious means needs to be recovered – whether the Congress Party, their President, the concerned Ministers, the officials or the entire Cabinet on the basis of collective responsibility.

Unfortunately, as freebooters help themselves, these two worthies have chosen to conveniently look the other way. Sardar Manmohan Singh’s justification may be that he is merely following the philosophy of the revered Guru Nanak who had said: “Ram ki Chidiya Ram ka Khet, Khalo Chidiya Bhar Bhar Pet”. In this case, the Chidiya refers to the people’s representatives and the Khet refers to the people’s money.

All the Singh's Men

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 12:26:00 +0000

The Manmohan Singh Government had promised to achieve a lot in 100 days after coming back after already having been there during the previous five years.

It is over 200 days now and by way of the so-called ‘all-inclusive growth’ that they claim to propound, the main achievement which people see is the ‘all-inclusive’ uncontrolled inflation that spares no one and is especially hurting the poor and the middle class who continue to be at the receiving end.

Leaving aside a broader analysis of his Government’s working, it is worthwhile to list some (but not all) of the useless, the non-performers and the laggards in his Ministry. Even more important it is to list some of the Ministers whose working is not aboveboard, to put it extremely mildly.

Crown of Thorns

Starting with Manmohan Singh, he has to his credit mainly his honesty of purpose and dedication. Other than that, he has left no one in doubt that he does not have the will or the inclination to act on many issues relating to Government which he is supposed to head, without the say-so of his Party Boss. It is perhaps, this determination not to upset the apple cart driven by his Boss that keeps him from taking action against erring Ministers in the Cabinet.

Sharad Pawar

Sharad Pawar - useless and incompetent

At the top of the list of Ministers whose continuance is doing immense harm to the country is obviously, Sharad Pawar. His indifference and his callous approach to matters under him are too widely recognized. Amidst continuous and unrestrained rise in prices of food products, he has been inventing any number of excuses ever since his first term where he started by blaming fuel prices, rise in international prices (even if the country is self-sufficient) and a host of other excuses unrelated to his own incompetence. While repeating ad nauseum that the Government is very serious and doing everything possible (cleverly saying Government not just himself, to put the blame on the entire Government), he has very little to show for what actually he has done himself. Of course, during his term, there has been a wheat scam, a sugar scam, a rice scam and perhaps, some as-yet-not-known scams. But scams and motivated decisions have always been known to be there wherever he is involved. Knowing his past and present, there may be very few in the country, who will honestly vouch for his integrity. If he is still surviving in the Ministry, it is only because of his manipulative and arm-twisting capability vis-a-vis Singh's Party Boss.

Apart from the present dismal situation of food availability, Pawar has hardly done anything worthwhile to ensure the food security of the people for the future. In fact, due to the total lack of any purposeful actions during his term, the country is headed for a serious scarcity situation in the years to come. That is the legacy this man is going to leave for the people. He may well be voted the worst Agriculture Minister the country has had so far.

After having run out of believable explanations and excuses, he has repeated without a modicum of sense of responsibility, for the second time in as many months that only an astrologer can predict when the prices would come down. What the aam admi needs now is an astrologer not to predict when the prices would come down, but for how long would the country suffer him as a Minister.

He needs to be removed from the Ministry, whether ceremoniously or unceremoniously, but without delay. The aam admi has been waiting to say Good Riddance to him.

Praful Patel

Praful Patel

As Minister for Civil Aviation in the previous Government, he has successfully mismanaged the national carrier Air India/Indian Airlines under the tutelage of his party chief Pawar. That an airline with a globally known Brand was brought on the brink in such a short period speaks volumes for this Minister’s capabilities. And yet, he has kept on saying that Air India was always free to take decisions and at the same time blaming global recession for its woes. Those in the airlines, including the employees’ Unions, know only too well about the interference in their affairs which not only accelerated the financial losses but also the loss of market share to other airlines with whom the Minister and his Boss are known to have cozy relations. ( see also here)

Apart from the airlines debacle, favors were also granted to the GMR/GVK led Consortia running Delhi and Mumbai airports, by allowing them to recover from hapless passengers airport development fees after the contract was won by them based on the original tender conditions. An effort is also being made to favor GVK led Joint Venture for Mumbai Airport by allowing them to sell 200 acres of land, ostensibly taken for airport development earlier, to give them a windfall of over Rs, 10,000 crores. Of course, these two incidents have caught the people’s attention as they are now in public domain. Skeletons that may still be rattling underneath the Civil Aviation carpet will be known only when they spring out in future.

S M Krishna

S M Krishna

After coming out from gubernatorial hibernation, he has been favored with the External Affairs portfolio. International Relations is a sensitive issue requiring a Minister to have considerable vision and an alert mind. S M Krishna, a Fulbright scholar is performing only as half-bright and is constantly at sea and at loss of words to forcefully convey anything sensible on foreign policy. Foreign Policy has always been a weak point with India and giving such an important Ministry to a person whose mind is no longer alert and where he is totally out of depth can only further weaken India’s stature in the world. It is hardly possible to gain in stature by offering good hospitality to foreign dignitaries as is being done by Krishna.

Murli Deora

Deora

As Petroleum Minister, he has been seen to be consistently supporting and favoring a particular business group with whom he is known to have close relations. He is also the Minister who in November 2008 bypassed the Prime Minister by writing directly to the party boss about pricing of petroleum products, a subject which was under the discussion within the Government possibly also violating his Oath of Office. So much for his loyalty to his Prime Minister, who unfortunately is not able to act despite such incidents and despite the Minister having made the Government go through awkward situations in a legal dispute on gas pricing.

Mamata Banerjee

Mamata

The absentee Railway Minister who promised a White Paper on Railways during Laloo’s time, did publish the White Paper along with a Vision Document. But everyone knows that her heart and mind are set on the West Bengal Chief Minister’s seat. For all practical purposes, she is just warming the Railway Minister’s chair till the elections. Not much can be expected when most of her time is spent in her home state.

A. Raja

Raja

He is a liability thrust upon the people by DMK, the coalition partner of the present Government. His suspect role in the 2G Spectrum scam that led to a huge loss estimated to be Rs. 22,000 crores to the public exchequer – the tax payer is by now known to everyone, including the Prime Minister who is intent on keeping such bad apples in the apple cart. Raja like many other Ministers in similar situations, is defending himself saying he only followed procedures and also consulted the Prime Minister, forgetting that as Minister, he is responsible to ensure that the public exchequer gets what it should and he is there not just to follow procedures.

CP Joshi

Joshi

He is a laggard whose only interest, as seen during the Lok Sabha debates was to question the opposition parties for what they did not do, rather than answering the questions put to him. He could not clarify exactly what, if anything, he was doing himself as Minister. His highly immature performance during the Lok Sabha debates does not inspire any confidence at all in his ability to do justice to his job.

Azhagiri alias Alagiri

Azhagiri

He is another liability on the people from DMK. It is not known how he can perform any of his responsibilities without communicating with the Babus and Cabinet colleagues except by sign language when he does not understand any language other than his own mother tongue. Sadly, Singh is unable to even ask him to quit because Singh does not speak in Tamil.

Sushil Kumar Shinde and Vilasrao Deshmukh

Shinde
Vilasrao

Two of the lacklustre Ministers from Maharashtra have practically nothing to show for what they have done. While Vilasrao obviously does not have to do much at the Centre where he can no longer oblige the builders and developers, Shinde is in charge of the critical power ministry. They have been carrying on with the same tardiness which is their characteristic.

Some others
Then there are the goofer-gaffers, flipper-floppers and twatter-twitters. Sincere though they may be, they are prone to land the Government in embarrassing situations from time to time.

Azad
Sibal
Jairam
Tharoor

While the above is a listing of only the Ministers, mention must be made of two others who are in similar high positions but the people are unclear about their usefulness.

Montek Singh
Narayanan

Montek Singh’s achievement as Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission is hard to evaluate as he has been largely seen commenting only on matters on which the Ministers concerned are required to speak. Narayanan’s actual contribution as the National Security Advisor also remains obscure.

The above list is naturally not exhaustive and there may be other Ministers well qualified to take the place in the backhanded Honor Roll. Readers are free to make their nominations in the Comments section.

* For a plot synopsis of the well-known movie "All the King's Men", see here.

Austerity - A One Act Farce for Every Season

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 14:19:00 +0000

Pranab Mukherjee, the Finance Minister sounded the bugle earlier in the month to announce the new and improved version of the Farce called Austerity for the new season.

Sound of the Bugle

The prelude was the reported displeasure of his party President Sonia Gandhi that S.M.Krishna, the Minister for External Affairs and Shashi Tharoor, the Minister of State in the same Ministry had been staying in five star hotels running up bills worth crores of rupees, to be met from the tax payers’ funds. The Finance Minister “requested” both the Ministers to immediately move to more appropriate accommodations. The ministers grudgingly agreed, while vaguely hinting that they had made their own private arrangements for stay as the official accommodations were not ready.

This incident was the cue for Pranab Mukerjee to announce further austerity measures also involving restrictions on flying in Business Class (domestic) and First Class (foreign).

Deja Vu?

The 2008 Season
Story idea by Manmohan Singh, Script by Chidambaram

The 2009 Season

Story idea credited to Sonia Gandhi, Script credited to Pranab Mukherjee

The Congress Party has obviously been honing the art of diverting the attention of the gullible public whenever any burning issue, especially one that burns large holes in the people’s pockets, comes up. Just over a year ago in early June 2008, the lead was taken by the Prime Minister when he asked the Ministers “to severely curtail expenditure on air travel, particularly foreign travel, except in cases where it is deemed to be absolutely necessary.” This prompting was promptly followed up by the then Finance Minister Chidambaram whose Ministry issued guildelines for expenditure management.(see here) Incidentally, such guidelines were issued just nine months before, in September 2007 as well. What was the ostensible reason and backdrop for the 2008 season Austerity? It was the “continuing rise in global crude oil and commodity prices”. The Prime Minister wrote his letter just a day after the Government had announced a back breaking increase in the price of Petrol and Diesel by Rs. 5 and Rs. 3 per liter respectively and the price for cooking gas by Rs. 50 a cylinder. The immediate victims of the Prime Ministerial missive then were four ministers Chidambaram, Deora, Mani Shanker Aiyer and Ambika Soni who were forced to cancel their scheduled foreign jaunts.

The reason for the new season’s version of the Farce of Austerity is the drought that the country is facing! The relevant instructions from the Finance Ministry say the measures are necessary: “...in view of the current fiscal situation and that arising out of insufficient rain in large parts of the country, and the consequent pressure on Government’s resources”. Last year, the story idea was provided by the Prime Minister. This year, the same story idea is shown to be that of Sonia Gandhi. The script was written last year by Chidambaram whose name for the same script with minor changes is replaced by that of Pranab Mukherjee.

The Real Objective

It is very clear to those who are well versed in the ways of the Congress party that the benefits of any such austerity drive are only incidental and the real motivation is provided by other factors. Last year, it was to divert the attention of the people from the uncontrolled inflation and the unpleasant increase in fuel prices announced by Government. This year, it is not due to the drought, but to take the focus away from the the intolerable increases in the prices of all essential food products including dal and sugar brought about largely by the successful mismanagement of the Agriculture Ministry by Sharad Pawar, even before the effects of the drought on the coming crop. Whatever be the reason for the austerity drive, it has for the time being diverted the focus of the public attention to relatively harmless discussions about austerity, comments of some ministers, etc. which the Government does not mind as long as the more serious issues (of which there is no dearth) are moved backstage.

How the Farce unfolds....

The Farce as it is being played is fully adaptable and capable of improvisations by the characters as the situation demands. Here is how fools, knaves and others showed their improvising talents.

Cast of characters 2009

It was Shashi Tharoor, one of the two men who were the immediate targets of the Austerity who candidly and rightly interpreted the incident as “silly-season” - a time usually marked by news stories over frivolous matters - controversy. But Shashi Tharoor, a greenhorn in Congress culture has apparently not yet imbibed the kowtow culture where no one says that the emperor has no clothes. Nor has he matured as yet from the twitter-twatter culture that thrives on fluff and frivolity. So he followed up his earlier comment with a rather tasteless remark calling the economy class in air travel as “cattle class”, although to be fair, it is a term which even those who travel by that class do not mind using. The often abrasive and impertinent spokesperson of Congress party Tiwari, said that his party members were even ready to travel in the plane’s cargo hold. Hear, hear! Vilasrao Deshmukh suddenly became conscious that they were a government for the aam admi so why should they mind travelling together with the common man.

However, at the Cabinet level, many ministers from the senior to the junior objected. Kamal Nath and the first time Minister Anand Sharma wanted to travel First Class while travelling abroad. Farooq Abdullah objected to economy class. Sharad Pawar objected to travelling economy class. After all, what use is the personal wealth and official power with a body to match, if one cannot at least travel in any class that one pleases with the tax payers’ money? He also indulged in absolute pettiness seeking clarification whether foreign dignitaries could be treated in five star hotels. Maran raised a more serious objection to some ministers like Home, Finance, Defence and External Affairs travelling by special aircraft as per their entitlement. Pawar’s second in command Praful Patel made the general approach of politicians on austerity very clear: : “... austerity is now beginning to be required by politicians back home...at least we have to appear to be austere, if nothing else". (see here) So, this is the aproach: to appear to be austere.

The underlying tone of whatever the Ministers and others said was that such measures were meaningless and impinged on their privilege to spend public funds. Pranab Mukherjee, the scriptwriter quickly changed the script to reveal the real plot. While appearing to reject the Ministers’ demands for travelling in higher classes, he also said that “these were unusual times and austerity measures were for one year only.” There, the cat is out of the bag. The measures are only for the year which could be interpreted as only for this financial year, i.e. for another seven months. (see here)

Trivialities and tomfoolery

At the same time, to show that they were taking the advice seriously albeit reluctantly, the ministers have started falling over each other to let the media know that they had already started travelling economy class as if that is the sole barometer of austerity.

To cap it all, the President of the Congress party Sonia Gandhi travelled to Mumbai by economy class. Her son too, in a well-publicised manner, chose to travel to somewhere by train in the chair car. Both of them managed one more opportunity for cheap publicity from the news-starved media which revels in such trifles. But for the faithful, it was one more in a string of "sacrifices" made by the family for the country. And as far as Rahul, the son, is concerned, by fortuitous coincidence, a few boys pelted stones on his train as it passed by on the way. After that incident, how could the security agencies not take notice? Security is paramount and so, these two worthies might be forced to give up making such sacrifices in travel matters in the future, much against their wishes. How very convenient! A couple of points, however, need to be noted. It must be presumed that the travel bills of Sonia Gandhi and her son would have been borne by the Congress party and not by the taxpayers. At the same time, the higher bills for their enhanced security while travelling by such insecure modes would have to be borne by the exchequer. What do such gimmicks achieve then?

The substance of it...

Talking about the austerity measures on travels, it needs to be asked as to what is the actual amount of savings expected to be achieved which would be meaningful to relieve pressure on finances due to drought, which is supposedly the reason for the Austerity. In the first place, the instructions issued last year in June 2008 were expected to be followed with proper monitoring. If the Government claims to be at all serious, it ought to have first told the people in a transparent manner the achievements from the previous austerity instructions. According to Budget estimates for 2009-2010, the travel expenses under the Head Establishment are Rs. 2,506.67 crores, a jump from Rs. 1860.26 crores in the previous year. Of this, the travel expenses of the Ministry of Home Affairs have jumped from Rs. 25.99 crores to Rs. 82.62 crores. The travel expenses estimates of The Cabinet are Rs. 179.22 crores which for some strange reason were only Rs. 17.82 crores in the previous year. (see here) It must also not be forgotten that the Government had ordered in 2005 not one but three aircraft for the travel by the President and the Prime Minister, at a cost of Rs. 937 crores. The first aircraft was delivered in August 2008 followed by the other two and the maiden flight was inaugurated by the President on 1st April 2009. One aircraft is understandable, even two, because we want to project ourselvs as a superpower with such show. But three?

Taking a larger canvas, travelling expenses are just a drop in the ocean when seen in the context of the overall expenditure budget of the Government of India. No one is saying as to what is being actually done or achieved with regard to plugging the massive leakages in developmental expenditures, normal revenue expenditures, plan expenditures and expenditure on populist schemes meant for the poor but utilized to create more wealth for those who have the authority to use the funds. It is hard to see any worthwhile action because obviously the vested interests of the politicians will be hurt.

Hypocrisy starting from high places

All this fakery is resulting in an ostentatious display of mock austerity that at best can achieve only paltry savings at the end of the day, when compared to the overall spending by the Government. The Congress party is quite adept at such sham, stunts and subterfuge at all levels as seen in Andhra Pradesh recently where it transpired that the stories of over a hundred people committing suicide on hearing of the death of their beloved leader were fake and people had been actually paid to attribute deaths from other causes to death from shock!

And this hypocrisy is starting from the top and trickles down at all levels and becomes pervasive. Just one example would suffice to show how absolutely phony is the concern of the Congress Party President, Sonia Gandhi for austerity. The Government has been releasing advertisements without any real reason in national newspapers at the slightest pretext ostensibly highlighting this achievement or that plan. All these advertisements prominently carry a photograph of the Congress President Sonia Gandhi who is no one in Government. Several billion rupees have already been spent and are continuing to be spent from the tax payers’ money primarily to show her photographs with a regularity which people are increasingly finding quite repugnant. It is simply not conceivable that Sonia Gandhi does not see her own face in such advertisements which serve no other purpose than to constantly keep her in the public eye. She is also certainly aware that her picture should not be there in official government advertisements at all. She is also not ignorant that the advertisements cost money and that the entire expenditure on such advertisements is wasteful and useless. Yet, she is fully relishing and revelling in the free publicity that she gets at State expense rather than spending the money from her own pocket or that of her party. What is this, if not two-facedness and pretense and dishonesty? If she believes at all in what she is trying to preach those in Government, she should have already shown her honesty and asked her party to reimburse to the exchequer whatever amount has been spent on advertisements with her picture in them and asked her yes-men in Government to stop at least showing her picture in Government advertisements. This will certainly not happen and she will still keep looking at her picture in the advertisements and smile to herself. And the sycophantic ministers will keep misusing their authority to show their own picture along side hers, and feel as pleased as she would. Even Pranab Mukherjee the Finance Minister does not have the courage to do what he should have done in this matter i.e. ask the Congress Party or Sonia Gandhi to pay up for the advertisements. Is it not ironic that the ministers who are working in Government and responsible to the people have to curtail their expenses whereas someone who preaches such austeriy but has absolutely no accountability continues to enjoy free publicity at expense incurred illegally by the Goverment just as in the case of Mayawati? Obviously for Sonia Gandhi, austerity begins at home - someone else's home.

The party and the Government have indeed been developing an odious record when it comes to hoodwinking the people. The present Farce on Austerity is just a manifestation of that mentality. Let the people pay their taxes and let them not worry how it is spent. They can wait for a new version of the Farce in the next season.

Independence Day – Tryst with Promises

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 06:59:00 +0000

Tryst with Destiny

For one more time, the Prime Minister of India, this time Manmohan Singh, addressed the nation from the ramparts of the Red Fort on Independence Day, 15th August, 2009. The occasion of Independence Day is our annual tryst with unkept promises to redeem the “pledge” of the earlier generation that brought us our freedom. That, seems to be the destiny of our people, a far cry from what was visualized by the leaders of our freedom struggle.

I have (unkept) promises to keep, and miles to go....

(Robert Frost)

Like many times before, the address of the Prime Minister was deja vu, a mix-and-match of promises old and new, very many of which have been presented at different times over the last 60 years or so in some form or the other. Year after year, over a billion people - many cynical and many still credulous - listen to promises presented in new garbs, embellished with empty words of sympathy and understanding for the plight of the people.

Sixty two years after the famous speech by Jawaharlal Nehru, the struggle for freedom from want and hunger still continues and may continue for another generation.

Here is a quick look at the real "reality show" of THE PEOPLE.

Security and safety of life ....Terrorists are responsible

House and shelter......High Prices and Shortage

Power....High prices and Shortage

Food....High prices and Shortage

Water.......Shortage

If they can't get bread, let them have cake - Marie Antoinette(?)

It is true, however, that in the ultimate analysis WE THE PEOPLE are responsible for our miseries. We keep on exercising our democratic rights in a non-serious manner by electing parties and persons who do not deserve to be elected ever and by not raising our voices loudly enough when those in authority misuse their power and fail to do their duty.

The only pledge the people need to take is to become responsible citizens who know how to exercise their rights and who also know their duties towards the society and discriminate between right and wrong.

JAI HIND

Air India - Chickens coming Home...

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:51:00 +0000

see previous articles here and here

Finally the chickens are coming home to roost as Air India, the National Airlines that should have been brought to a level that it could have become the pride of the country, has been brought to the brink.

The Airlines is even having to delay payment of its monthly wage bill to the employees and the situation is not about to get any better soon unless the Government is made to bail it out. The employees who, incidentally, are no credit to their organization, are up in arms.

Agitating Employees
Red Flag for the Employees - too late to change, get ready for the sack

Sadly, this turn of events was visualized as early as 2005. Exactly a little over four years ago, Prajatantra had said almost prophetically (see here):

“It remains to be seen whether the Government considers itself capable of achieving these tasks or is only delaying the process of disengagement and disinvestment. The country has lost heavily over the years by way of lost opportunities, due to inept management by the Government. Huge resources invested over the years have not yielded the desired results. It is now time for accountability. It would simply not do to commit further public resources and THEN hand over the assets and/or reins to outsiders on a platter – a possibility, which is already being forecast by some.”

Another article around the same time (

see here) further highlighted the shameful positions of the national airlines amongst the airlines of the world, once again hinting that the airlines could disappear in the oblivion without all out efforts.

Praful Patel - The man on the spot

And the man who was fully aware of the serious situation and expected to guide and direct these efforts to pull out the Airlines from the morass was the Minister of Civil Aviation. After all, the present condition of the airlines is not merely because of incompetent managements and employees but also due to lack of vision, inadequate responses and interference of the Ministry without any accountability - problems which only he could deal with.

Indeed, when Air India’s massive aircraft order of US $ 7 bn. to Boeing became controversial, Praful Patel casually shrugged it off saying that he had to think of future planning! (

see here). It was a strange statement, coming from the Minister responsible for the entire Civil Aviation sector, that an order for Rs. 33,000 crore was a petty matter, notwithstanding that Air India would have to justify such a huge capital expenditure by its earnings. Observers of what was happening saw in his statement, a wish to avoid an awkward discussion with regard to the contract. Taking his remark that he “had to think of future planning” at face value, by now he would have personally ensured in five years that the face of the national Airlines was completely changed to place them on a sound footing to regain leadership and remain competitive for the long run, rather than having to say now that “the management had complete freedom to act”.

Freedom to act

And what was his grand plan for the National Airlines?

He first changed the name of Indian Airlines to “Indian”, a part of a supposed image make over - Go for cosmetic face change if a real change from within is not possible. After all, Swissair (which collapsed earlier) changed its name to “Swiss”, so why not? It was a decision in the abstract, just spending a lot of money on the re-branding related activities – logos, designing, painting, advertising campaign and the like. The Minister grandly proclaimed: “We're sending out a strong signal that we're ready to take on private airlines. We can do it." (Dec. 2005) Since the name was changed, other airlines were allowed and indirect favors given to enable them to merrily go about increasing their share. Indian, previously a monopoly and with a half-century head start, ceded over 80% and now has only 17% of the domestic market. That is the situation of the Airline that has full Government backing and a Minister who is engaged in “future planning” (sell-out?). About the International Operations of Air India, whatever was said in the earlier articles has changed only for the worse.

The second measure was to form NACIL in 2007 to integrate Air India and Indian to supposedly take advantage of synergies between the two. With this plan, it was also understood that the name “Indian” would disappear, after having wasted huge resources in the re-branding exercise. In a classic case of putting the cart before the horse (see the Maharaja on the horseback

here), NACIL was formed without having any firm road map at all. This is evident from the fact that the so-called integration has not happened except perhaps the synergies of inefficiencies. A Business Process Re-engineering Consultancy RFI (Request for Information) was published as late as November 2008!

Other than these two measures and the earlier decision to place a “petty” order for Boeing aircraft, there is very little to show for what the Honorable Minister did in his previous stint, except uttering inanities and asking the management of the airlines to shape up. Most of the time of the ‘thinking for future planning’ seems to have been taken up in dishing out lucrative contracts for airport construction and maintenance. This is not to say that airport development is not equally important but retrieving the situation of the airlines was of prime importance as well. Instead, it has been allowed to deteriorate further which is hardly something that can be brushed aside.

Admittedly, there are immense problems with the National airlines, not too easy to solve, starting with employees unwilling to change with the times. But that is what he had set out to do. He should have acted in time, with urgency and done everything necessary including sacking of recalcitrant and useless employees. He did not do this.

Incidentally, the Honorable Minister also had a media blitz advertising campaign “Wings of Progress” designed with his picture prominently displayed lest people forget about his wonderful contribution to the growth of civil aviation in the country. Domestic Airline companies (including Air India), Airports Authority and airport contractors dependent upon the blessings of his Ministry, were made to fork out about Rs. 22 crore for the Campaign (see here).

The employees - major contributories to the inefficiencies

The Employee Unions have been pointing fingers at the Ministry under his charge for deliberately allowing a situation to be created whereby the airlines would not remain viable. This perception is getting wide spread as it is unthinkable that the Ministry which would not feel shy of interfering in the affairs of the airlines over relatively smaller issues would not exercise its authority to set things right, particularly if as is made out, the airlines management was not able to prevent a further slide. After all, it is the Ministry that is finally responsible for ensuring that the national assets under its charge are not allowed to go waste by neglect.

Air India is believed to have incurred losses last year in excess of Rs. 4,000 crore and is said to be looking for infusion of equity, soft loans as well as grant. At long last, the Minister has announced that a restructuring is planned to happen within 30 days. This would involve an overhaul of the airlines with a board of distinguished outside directors and also a multinational management team starting from the COO. To deflect responsibility, he has once again said that Air India must shape up and become leaner and trimmer. To take such actions at this late stage suggests that in all likelihood this could at best turn out to be just a mock drill. The Minister may be looking for these new teams to pull his already burnt chestnuts out of fire or come up with the conclusion that the situation is irretrievable. In the end, the country may end up selling its national pride for a pittance together with Rs. 33,000 crore worth of new aircraft procured under a "petty" order.

It is true that the management and the indifferent employees of the Airlines are responsible for many of the problems over the years. They have no excuse for their inefficiencies and incompetence and must bear the consequences for their own faults even if it means losing their jobs. But there is also a larger issue involved that of the failure of the Ministry and the man at its helm to take timely actions. Therefore, a complete overhaul should involve not only the airlines but also the Ministry at whose doorstep the ultimate responsibility for the mess becoming messier really lies. If no action is taken on this score, it would mean continuing with lack of accountability, incompetence and apathy of the bureaucrats and Ministers for whom turn around, bail out or belly-up make little difference.

.

Election Vignettes

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Fri, 15 May 2009 11:07:00 +0000

As the insane struggle for seeking power to form the next Government has already begun, it may perhaps be a good last opportunity to have a light-hearted look at some Election Vignettes. These random images inevitably revolve around the party that has been engaged in bravado, bluff and bluster yet scarcely able to hide its recurring bouts of desperation and panic which are clearly evident from its harried actions to seek help from all and sundry.

Inviting others - with Olive Branch (Italian or Swiss Olives?)

Come one, come all

Over the last few years, that Party is beginning to resemble a Circus. Unlike a Circus, however, there are no real Lions. The only Lions are Lion (Singh) by name or sheep, lambs, cats, mice or other domesticated types in Lion’s or Tiger’s clothing but cowering at the crack of the Ringmaster’s whip. Many other species including the wild types also could be spotted if one looked hard enough. (see also here and here) If a name has to be given to this Circus, it can be called Snow White’s Circus. Snow White is to show the Party’s current awe for white skin and because there are so many dwarfs surrounding the Ringmaster-Owner that the name would be quite apt.

Now for the Election Vignettes...

A tale (and tails) of many purring Lions (Singhs)

A whip and a chair
click to listen

Learning the Tricks

At the top of the Lions (Singhs) is naturally Manmohan Singh, the Madame’s pro tempore choice as Prime Minister.

Many words have been spoken by others and by Manmohan Singh himself to show in words how he is not weak. In the height of election campaigning, it was the Party’s secondary campaign theme. The fact that it has to be said over and over again is a good enough indication of the strength of the assertions. It is also to be recognized that having strength and having the guts to use the strength on one’s own are two different things. So also, is there a difference between “strong” and “not weak” but these subtleties are of no consequence when people have reached their own conclusions.

Sad Story of another Singh (Lion)

The saddest part of these elections as far as the one-time stalwart Arjun Singh is concerned, was the denial of tickets to his son as well as daughter. He met this fate despite his loyalty to the party. During the high drama surrounding the anti-reservation stir, he was the one who bore the brunt of the students' ire. Shrewd that he is, he was trying to earn credit for himself. But it cannot be denied that the Party too was keen to ride on this vote-catching yet short-sighted policy action. In the fag end of his career, where he is himself virtually incapacitated, he would have hoped that the least the Party could do for him was to give tickets to his children in keeping with the tradition of dynastic succession. And who else in the same boat (children of senior Partymen) were given tickets?

Rahul Gandhi
Sachin Pilot
Jyotiraditya Scindia
Jitin Prasada
Milind Deora
Priya Dutt

And how are any of these ‘worthies’ more qualified than Arjun’s children? No wonder that Arjun Singh was hurt. But again being a Lion only in name, the foxy-lamb just cowered and sulked and wept and stuck to his Chair to clear some important appointments of favorites in the last few days.

The other Singhs

Natwar Singh, Madhavsinh Solanki, Karan Singh, Digvijay Singh, Shanker Singh Vaghela were/are the other Singhs in the Party– some of whom already met similar fate as Arjun Singh and others will face the same. It is not enough to be called a Singh or to simply don Lion’s clothing if in the end, one can only whimper at the mere sound of a whip.

Lions from other Forests

The other two Singhs who found themselves to be at the receiving end of the Party’s ‘use-and-abuse’ culture while not even being in the Party, are:
Mulayam Singh and his all-purpose, all-important Amar Singh.

Forgetting the past so soon....

Yet, learn they will not and will fall once again in the trap and repent later, once more. These are the people that keep alive the proverb “History repeats itself”.

Of Rahul

What can be said of him. Not known to be a person of any proven capabilities and a GRAD (generally recognized as dull), he is suddenly being thrust into the centrestage and touted as the most capable person in his party. He is made to rub shoulders and share the stage with Manmohan Singh, one of the most highly respected persons in his own field of knowledge and a person to whom Rahul cannot hold a candle. As a sort of quid pro quo for the family acknowledging Manmohan Singh as not a weak Prime Minister, even the latter was obliged to say in public that Rahul had all the qualities of being a good Prime Minister, the prime quality being, of course, that he is Madame's son. The fact that the Party as a whole has become an enthusiastic spectator to this spectacle only shows that those bereft of capability, sycophants, opportunists and other assorted hangers- on who are apparently in the majority in the Party, are interested only in blindly following the Party Owner's wish as their command. The Party of Tall Men and Women who created it in the past, appears to have become a Party of pygmies and dwarfs with even smaller minds.

Chinese Feng-shui may be passé
There are some alernatives available, though.

Indian Fenk-Shoe-yee

This is the alternative not acceptable to politicians who know that in this variation of the Feng-shui, they will only get what they deserve and what the people want them to get, not what they want.

Italian Feng Shoeee - the new fancy?

Gucci, Prada, Ferragamo...$279-587

Many leaders in this major political party may be looking at a new Feng Shoee where the lucky charm to be kept at home to bring luck are Designer Italian Ladies shoes. These could be just placed at some special place or displayed in the living room. Some day, perhaps, the Italian Dame Luck may smile upon the person having the right shoes in his/her possession.

A Presto.

The Dance of the Demons

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 04:33:00 +0000

The debris and the dead bodies from the carnage and mayhem unleashed on Mumbai for 60 hours from the night of 26th November 2008 may have been cleared. But the damage to a nation’s pride left behind by the Dance of the Demons cannot be undone.

Just a handful of men, ten by official count, armed to the teeth set sail from a neighboring country, landed on the shores of the country in Mumbai in a rubber dinghy, slipped in to the city with incredible ease and began, with equal ease, their spree of death and destruction as the entire country watched incredulously and shell-shocked in utter disbelief. They let loose their bloody carnage at five carefully chosen locations. These were: Cafe Leopold a restaurant existing since over a hundred years and popular with tourists, Hotels Taj Mahal and Oberoi Trident, CST, one of the main rail terminii within the city and a private building, Nariman House. They also planted at least eight bombs, two of them in taxis which exploded. They were obviously helped in their task also by elements within the country in different ways, and particularly in selecting the specific target locations, one of which, Nariman House housing Jews was so obscure that even most residents of the area would not have been aware of its existence and significance. The entire world watched how easily a country, whose leaders would make its people believe that the country would be a Super Power, could be shamed and humiliated.

Reams have been written and hundreds of hours of telecast have shown the details of the operation that followed where the city and the nation were held to ransom for a full 60 hours. In the end, the valiant efforts of the brave-heart security forces including the police and the National Security Guards, the naval commandos and para military forces as well as the fire brigade succeeded, as they ought to have, to bring an end to the sickening event. The ten men’s bloody carnage left 183 dead and 310 wounded, amongst them many foreigners. Twenty men from the police and the National Security Guards laid their lives. Of the ten terrorists, one man was shot dead and one captured by the police away from the main scene as those two tried to escape to nowhere. The remaining eight were killed by the National Security Guards.

For a vivid imagery of the nightmare, see here (Unfortunately not available any longer)

Not in their wildest fears could the citizens of the country imagine that such an attack on the soil of the country could take place not by any regular armed forces but by less than a dozen men - no more than mere foot soldiers. The nation feels utterly humiliated and its pride is badly bruised and scarred indelibly. The bitter resentment, anger and frustration of the people at their own vulnerability and the intolerable callousness of the Government have been finding expression beginning with a spontaneous rally of a hundred thousand citizens protesting in Mumbai.

And who should be held accountable for the inexcusable failure to secure the lives and safety of the helpless and vulnerable people? Looking to events of the recent past, there is absolutely no doubt that the prime and paramount responsibility for the situation that emboldened the terrorists and made their task to carry out the attack not too difficult, lies on the political establishment at the Centre and the State.

Although, in principle, the entire Central Government should bear the responsibility it is clear to all that the two political parties that should bear the brunt are Congress and NCP. As far as the Congress party is concerned, it is Sonia Gandhi who must own full moral responsibility for the mess. It is she who not only hand-picked Shivraj Patil at the Centre and Vilasrao Patil in Maharashtra State, but also continued with these recognized incompetent men, lending them her full support till the end when their continuance became totally untenable. The second more important reason is that the entire approach of the Congress Party and policy of the Government towards terror and dealing with the problem must flow from the ‘guidance and advice’ received from the Congress President. This has already been brought out clearly in earlier articles (here and here and here). The Home Ministry, in particular, is the domain and responsibility of the Congress Party in the coalition scheme. It is unthinkable that the Prime Minister and the Home Minister would pursue any policy line that was not dictated or blessed by their Party Chief. The soft or almost non-existent, unstated policy on terrorism followed by the Government could not have been adopted unless authored or approved by her. Likewise, Sharad Pawar of the NCP must also bear the moral responsibility for the consequences due to absence of a firm policy or action plan on terror in Maharashtra where the Home Ministry which was found totally wanting is in the NCP domain and was headed by R.R. Patil all along. Besides, Pawar also being an important Union Minister could at least have tried to influence the Centre’s policy line, being a partner in Maharashtra and having a background of the terror related events in the State.

The Puppeteer
chi è responsabile?

The Shield - Nursing the Headaches

The Puppets

The Auxiliary Support

In spite of this position, did these two worthies even whisper the possibility of accepting their responsibility? Did they show even a twinge of conscience? They did not. Instead, they cleverly pushed the blame on their orderlies. As far as the Congress is concerned, the Prime Minister was left defending the indefensible. Pawar went further and in his best tradition distanced himself and tried to shift the entire blame on the Congress by innuendo and oblique criticism.

The attack that in a way struck at the very root of the sovereignty of the country should have led these "leaders" and the Ministers concerned to hang their heads in shame. Yet, days after the event, these utterly shameless, callous and insensate persons were unrepentant, refusing to own responsibility and to be held accountable. The earlier articles on the subject bear careful reading as it would show how uncannily the history repeats every time there is a terrorist attack with the Government responses being entirely predictable, including blaming others for its own failure to deal with the problem on our own soil. (see here and here)

The impenitent political leadership once more started making empty noises, the intelligence agencies began blaming each other and the harum-scarum bureaucracy just remained impassive and unmoved. If anything, men like the Home Secretary Madhukar Gupta might have been elated that there was one more experience to learn from – going by his immature and imbecile comments last time when Delhi was attacked by terror. (see here)

When and only when the public pressure became too much, were the pawns in the game - the Home Minister of India, the Home Minister of Maharashtra and the Chief Minister of Maharashtra reluctantly pushed out. A day before he was forced to quit, Vilasrao, the brash Maharashtra CM, in a show of crass sauciness even took a movie producer with him on an “inspection tour” of one of the locations where the terrorists had created the maximum havoc. Incidentally, it is worthwhile referring to the following almost prophetic picture which was published in an earlier article in July 2008 (here). The suggestion intended in the picture was that the country had become a tourism destination for Terrorists. Vilasrao’s inspection tour, which has since been described as “Terror Tourism” has provided a strange twist and a somewhat different meaning to the picture.

Apart from a deliberately hazy policy, lack of comprehension of the gravity of the threat facing the country on the part of the Government and sheer incompetence of the Home Minister who did absolutely nothing visible while saying ‘It is not as if nothing has been done’ an environment existed (and may still exist) which could encourage the perpetrators of the attack. The shillyshallying bureaucracy at the Centre and the State obviously did not contribute anything towards improving the situation.

The intelligence and security failure
As details unravel, it is becoming clear that the success of the attack was due in no small measure to the failure of the intelligence and security agencies and the bureaucrats to do the jobs they are supposed to do. The absence of policy, effective direction and control from their political masters coupled with bureaucratic negligence obviously resulted in this state of affairs.

Amidst the usual cries about absence of actionable intelligence, information has filtered out to suggest that a considerable amount of intelligence, some of it even from foreign agencies, was made available to the agencies much before the attack took place. Even if the intelligence may not be “actionable” in the eyes of these agencies, certainly they would be expected to develop the same further and anticipate what might happen. The Terrorist threat is dynamic and demands preparedness and building threat scenarios all the time based on bits and pieces of intelligence available from any reliable source. It is certainly not just a question of waiting for actionable intelligence to fall into the laps. The task of the security agencies and the Ministries concerned is to visualize and build threat scenarios from valid intelligence and data and take appropriate steps. Intelligence programmes typically have several components viz. core systems, tasking, collection, processing and dissemination systems. It is how efficiently the entire architecture is put in place and executed that determines how effective the agencies are. There is no use insisting on intelligence that is complete and specific in every respect.

Actions that followed
Once the stupefied and indolent Government realized the full gravity of the situation and the implications – real as well as symbolic – on the credibility of the entire country and of the Government caught napping, it finally came out of its stupor and tried to galvanize itself into some action.

Its main actions are now directed towards putting pressure on Pakistan to stop its territory being used for terrorist activities directed towards India. This is an appropriate action under the circumstances. Even the USA sent Secretary of State Condolezza Rice to show solidarity with India. It, is however, also possible that the USA was quite alarmed at India’s vulnerability to such attacks, which was badly exposed. Being unsure of the Government’s response and handling, USA probably also wanted to discourage the Government of the day from taking unanticipated hasty actions that might disturb the situation in the region.

While the Government has taken a stern position against Pakistan, quite rightly so, it has also asked Pakistan once again to hand over certain persons wanted by India and living in Pakistan, including the notorious Dawood Ibrahim. Knowing the consistent belligerence of Pakistan with India on such issues, it is unlikely that this demand can yield anything. If the Government itself does not have the will or the ability to do anything to put out the assets and organization of people like Dawood within our own borders, it can hardly be expected of a not too friendly neighbor to deliver on a platter what India has demanded. Any actions that might follow either from our own Government or from other friendly countries to pressurize Pakistan into dismantling the terror apparatus on its soil and the like, may help in the long term but will not help us in the near future. And other than diplomatic actions of the kind that are already being pursued, there are no other hard options that may be exercised as the consequences could be quite unpredictable, particularly as the situation in Pakistan is far from stable with that country practically struggling to maintain its identity.

The main option before the Government is now to focus its attention on improving the situation within, from the ground up. The Ministers at the top have been sent packing. The Home Ministry still has a candidate who could be removed as a Minister of State whose role and usefulness appears to be limited to making controversial statements and criticizing the Opposition. Amongst the bureaucrats, by a stroke of good timing, some of them have already left the scene after the event. It may be time to take decisions on the National Security Advisor, the Home Secretary and the ever-so-controversial RAW chief. At the State level too, the new Chief Minister can be expected to let some heads amongst the bureaucracy and the police roll.

Other than that, the Government is talking of bits and pieces of actions to strengthen the security apparatus etc. but no comprehensive approach is visible even now. On the question of a special law to deal with terrorism, the Government so far has been cussedly opposed to it for reasons that are hard to fathom. Even now, its position on this subject remains ambivalent. It would still like to persist in considering terrorists as ordinary criminals and terrorism as a mere variant of organized crime at best! Such is the bankruptcy of thought in the Government and the political parties that are part of the Government. It is also now again talking of a federal agency for investigating terrorist related crimes. This is not something that can yield immediate results. Even now, the Government does not seem to have any stated policy on dealing with terrorism. The few disparate actions proposed are not what will remove the feeling of utter insecurity in the minds of the people.

The Governments both at the Centre as well as the States need to take actions that will lead to a visible change in perception that they cannot secure the life and safety of the people and so have lost the right to govern. What is needed is at once to instill fear in the minds of would-be terrorists and confidence in the minds of the people that the Government is in control.

Sadly, the situation is such that the people do not feel confident that the Government knows what it has to do or that it has the will or capability of doing it. The Government and the so-called leaders have proved themselves to be a disgrace to the country. The people can only hope that the end of the 60 hour Dance of the Demons does not turn out to be just an intermission, with more to follow.

Related articles:

Terror and the Benumbed State - July 27, 2008

The Final Shuffle of the UPA Ministerial Pack - July 30, 2008

Government on Terrorism-Towards Paralysis and Paranoia - Sept.28, 2008

Paranoia and Paralysis - Facing Terrorism - Oct. 5, 2008

Next see Living in the Shadow of insecurity - April 9, 2010

Government on Terrorism - Towards Paralysis and Paranoia

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 05:40:00 +0000

Mary had a little lamb,
Little lamb, little lamb,
Mary had a little lamb,
Its fleece was white as snow

Everywhere that Mary went,
Mary went, Mary went,
Everywhere that Mary went
The lamb was sure to go

The lamb grew into a sheep
And Mary gave him the House to keep

When the House he could not keep
At first he did peep and bleep
Till Mary told him to go to sleep
Then he let out a bleat and went to sleep,
Went to sleep, went to sleep...
*Peep =to speak in a hesitant, thin, high-pitched voice

Behind this light hearted twist to the nursery rhyme are hidden a multitude of feelings of shock, disgust, pain, hurt, anger, distress, disillusionment, despair and the realization by the people of the country that the present Government is completely incapable of meeting any threats to the safety and security of the people, whether from within or without.

Yet another blast took place on 27th Sept. in Delhi, the country’s Capital, exactly two weeks after the previous blasts on 13th Sept. 2008.

What the UPA Government has been saying and doing or not doing on the subject of Terrorists and Terrorism has become a matter of utter disbelief and incredulity in the minds of all right-thinking Indians. The people are well and truly fed up with the asinine utterings matched with inaction of those in authority. An earlier article (see here) has clearly analysed and pointed out some critical areas which, in fact, encourage terrorists to go about their business at will. Everything that has been said in that article has been borne out by events that have taken place before and since then.

The time has certainly come to first consider where the real responsibility lies and establish culpability for the loss of innocent lives – a negation of the right to live, the most fundamental of all human rights. The terrorist acts of anti national elements have assumed a regularity over the last four years that can be hardly expected or tolerated in a civilised country, much less in the largest democracy of the world. Each act of terrorism like bomb blasts is a brazen challenge to the writ of the State which has been getting progressively weakened.

In the minds of the people, there is no doubt that the Union Government has utterly failed in ensuring safety and security of the people. Within the Government, the blame has been largely placed on Shivraj Patil, the Minister for Home Affairs, he being in charge of the internal security. To be sure, he does have a responsibility in maintaining the internal security. But that is only a superficial and partial conclusion and it is necessary to look behind him to place the responsibility wherever it must be placed. He has been the ‘fall guy” and the people who should really also be held to account are content to let the perception strengthen that he is responsible. In reality, he is only the cat’s paw. It is time to fix the ultimate responsibility and let the culpability rest where it must.

To do so, one must hear the blarney that comes from the horse’s (or sheep's) mouth. Shivarj had this clear admission to make on his position as Home Minister on 15.9.2008.

“Well, I have full blessings of my leader”

This single statement by the Home Minister has several implications. First, that he owes his position solely to his party leader. Second, the Prime Minister’s prerogative to choose his Council of Ministers is completely irrelevant as far as including or dropping Shivraj is concerned. Third that Shivraj does not consider himself accountable to the Constitution or the people but only to his party chief at whose pleasure he survives. Although the reality of the Congress party and the constraints on the authority of the Prime Minister are well known, it is the brazen pronouncement of a senior Minister confirming this that is more shocking. More than all this, he seems to be clearly conveying to the world at large as well as his party chief that it was she who asked him to be the Home Minister and if things have gone wrong, she has also to take the blame.

What he seems to imply is completely true and the primary responsibility for the state of affairs in the Home Affairs must be placed on the leadership of his party, who chose a cross between a show horse and a pack horse to perform as a race horse. Parents of young school going kids also know the meaning of the word ‘aptitude’ and its importance in deciding an appropriate career path for their kids. The Congress party chief ought to know what everyone else knows that Shivraj just does not have the aptitude, let alone the temperament and capabilities to handle such a demanding job as the Home Minister considering the multitude of serious problems related to Home Affairs from infiltration to naxalism to terrorism. There was nothing in his previous record in Government to suggest that he was capable of handling this crucial portfolio. The main consideration for which he was chosen to be the Home Minister appears to have been what people already believe firmly: He was chosen primarily because the Ministry comprises the critical departments that handle sensitive matters related to political persons. Considering this, he had undisputed qualifications of loyalty to the Congress President coupled with a lack of any ambition to tempt him to use his access to the sensitive departments to gain unfair advantage for his own benefit. At the same time, he could be implicitly trusted to use these departments to show opponents or party rebels their place as and when required. On the other hand, anyone else who might have the competence to handle the Ministry would surely have higher ambitions and would not be averse to use his position for his own advantage and more importantly, to place some people in awkward situations. He may also not be so obliging as Shivraj. This double advantage really seems to have led to him being made the Home Minister. Other than this, there is no apparent justification at all for giving Shivraj the Home portfolio. Although his removal is clearly called for (see related article), the reason advanced for not doing so is that it would amount to acknowledging the failure of the Government. This is specious reasoning as the world already knows that the Government has failed. In fact, Shivraj has become a symbol of incompetence and his removal would send a signal that the Government means business. Therefore, the real reason appears to be that his removal would place the blame directly on the doorstep of the Congress President for choosing him in the first place. And the problem of finding a ‘trustworthy’ replacement would still remain. It is futile to expect a person selected and continued on such extraneous considerations to perform. The responsibility, therefore, for placing the country’s internal security in jeopardy must surely lie first and foremost on the Congress President and the Party who took the unwise political decision of nominating Shivraj in that position.

The second person who must own the responsibility is the person who heads the Government, Sardar Manmohan Singh. Agreed that he was also a reluctant candidate for the Prime Ministership. Unlike Shivraj though, he did have a good record as an eminent economist and a Minister of Finance and had sound administrative experience. When he very well knew that he had no temperament to deal with truant or non-performing ministers imposed on him from the Congress or the allies and keep them on a tight leash, he ought to have designated someone of the stature of Pranab Mukerjee as Deputy Prime Minister. Perhaps, the reason he did not do this could be the understandings with the allies on power sharing. Clearly the compulsions of coalition politics have played their own role in the failures of the present Government as a whole.

Although constitutionally the entire Cabinet has the collective responsibility, the other allies have been by and large deliberately distancing themselves from the mess as the Prime Minister as well as the Home Ministry and its Minister are Congress babies. It is hoped but not certain that at least in the Cabinet meetings, these allies have made their position or opposition clear on the state of affairs.

The conclusion is then inevitable that while the Government and the Union Cabinet have the constitutional responsibility, the real culpability for the continuing loss of innocent lives lies with the Congress party, the party chief Sonia Gandhi and the Prime Minister, also of the Congress, Sardar Manmohan Singh. The people have come to realise as much.

And what are the main characters viz. the Congress Party and the UPA Government, in one of the most sordid chapters on internal security in the country’s history doing now?

Let us examine that too………

(to be concluded - may be not finally)

The P.M.'s Independence Day Speech - Misinforming the people?

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:16:00 +0000

The Prime Minister of India made the Independence Day speech from the ramparts of the Red Fort on 15th August 2008. Apart from the usual hyperbole, a good part of the speech was devoted to extolling the virtues and achievements of his Government and at the same time adroitly making it known that everything that had gone wrong or was going wrong during its tenure so far could be attributed to others, including external factors.

Many of those who heard his speech must have gone away satisfied and suitably impressed that the country was indeed blessed to have a wonderful Government that was doing so much for the Aam Admi.

It is unfortunate that the occasion of an Independence Day speech of the Prime Minister was utilized to provide misinformation on some major issues to the people.

Reference is made to two of the points from his address.

Nuclear Deal

The Prime Minister stated:
“All over the world, there is growing realization of the importance of atomic energy to meet the challenge of energy security and climate change. It is a clean, environmental friendly and renewable source of energy.”

In the first place, there are differences of views on whether nuclear energy can be truly regarded as ‘clean and environment friendly’. For example, as one such differing view highlights:

“Whatever benefits nuclear technology may provide through decreased air pollutants are more than made up for by large and unresolved environmental problems. As of 2000, Canada has 35,000 tonnes of highly radioactive nuclear waste, with nowhere to put it.” (See here) Also read here and here,

But more significant is the Prime Minister’ assertion that nuclear energy is “…renewable source of energy.” This is not entirely accurate as nuclear energy is not regarded as a renewable resource, despite the efficiencies of breeder reactors.

The Energy Information Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy defines renewable energy resources as under:

“Renewable energy resources are naturally replenished in a relatively short period of time. They include biomass, hydropower, geothermal energy, wind energy, and solar energy.” (See here)

The primary material for nuclear energy Uranium, like fossil fuels is a finite resource and is not replenished or re-grown. Nor is it regenerated as much as is consumed.

In describing nuclear energy as a renewable resource in order to justify the Nuclear Deal, the Prime Minister has presented a view that is not universally accepted despite assertions by scientists like Prof. Bernard Cohen. It is interesting to know that it was none other than President George W. Bush of the USA who, while promoting nuclear energy within his own country, began describing nuclear energy in almost similar terms that the Prime Minister has used.

Bush had said: “Nuclear power is safe and nuclear power is clean and nuclear power is renewable,” and again “Nuclear power is renewable, and there are no greenhouse gases associated with nuclear power”. See here and here. Also read this.

Considering the background of events and the heavy influence of USA leading to the Nuclear Deal, it is not surprising that the Prime Minister echoed the exact thoughts of President Bush in his speech.

But in fact, soon after President Bush began describing nuclear energy as a clean and renewable resource, nearly 50 environmental, business, anti-nuclear, sustainable energy, and energy policy organizations openly disputed his statement in a letter to him. see here and also read here.

Furthermore, said the Prime Minister: “the nuclear agreement…….will open up new opportunities for trade in dual-use high technologies and nuclear materials and equipment, opening up new pathways to accelerate industrialization of our country. It will enable us to provide electricity to meet the needs of our farmers, our artisans, our traders and our industry.”

For the benefit of the people, the Government needs to inform in details what the “new opportunities in trading” and “new pathways to accelerate industrialization” are and their precise concrete benefits and the costs. As to the claim that the agreement will provide electricity to meet the needs of our farmers etc. it is misleading and a half-truth intended to convey as if all or a substantial part of the country’s electricity needs would be met as a result of the nuclear agreement.

The nuclear deal is now on way to being finalized. The Government must have felt itself justified in pushing it through. The desperation might have come also because of critical shortage of Uranium and non-availability of equipment likely to cause an imminent disruption even in the existing program. If that were to happen, it would cause great embarrassment. Whatever were the urgent or larger reasons, the deal is practically fait accompli and there is little to be gained from continuing to argue about the same. But the Prime Minister seems to have unnecessarily tried to provide information that is debatable, in order to justify the deal.

Inflation

On inflation, the Prime Minister was happy to dutifully repeat the information provided by the Sage of Sivaganga Chidambaram who revels in misleading the people at every opportunity to hide his own failures. The Prime Minister declared:
“The inflation we have seen this year is basically due to external factors. All over the world and in global markets the price of food, fuel and other commodities has been rising. In many developing countries the rate of inflation is double that in India. Our Government has worked hard to ensure that in India the rate of inflation is not as high as in many other countries. We have also taken special measures to insulate the poorer sections of our society from the full impact of rising food and fuel prices.”

These misleading arguments and alibis about external factors being largely responsible for the inflation and about India’s inflation being half of many developing countries have already been dealt with in an earlier article here. (see section: “Excuses, Blame Games and Buck passing”).

While the impact of rising oil prices over which the Government indeed does not have control, is understandable, the rising food prices abroad can hardly be used to justify inflation in the country when in the same breadth the Government claims to have record production of food grains. If imports had to take place, they were the result of the mess in agriculture sector due to lack of attention and faulty policies. It should also not be forgotten that it is this neglect and faulty policies that have cost over Rs. 71,000 crores in loan write-offs out of public funds. The WPI comprises of 435 items. For how many of these items does the Government hold the world responsible? How can the people be misled in such a brazen manner?

The Prime Minister also sadly parroted the Finance Minister’s deliberately misleading alibi that the inflation was lower than many countries. In this context, it was mentioned in the earlier article, "...inflation happens in all countries and some have low inflation while some others have higher inflation. Such comparisons cannot be used at will as justification for high inflation in our own economy. The inflation in each country is determined by a host of factors to which it is subject and if it is higher in some countries than in India, it gives no solace to the people. Such misleading and fallacious reasoning does not wash." Does the Government's alibi also mean that the country should rejoice and be grateful to the Government that it worked hard to ensure that the inflation is not high as in Zimbabwe? And precisely how has the Government 'worked hard', pray? It is not out of place to mention that while the Finance Minister and other so-called economists were shedding tears over the external factors and sitting helplessly, it took a maverick like Amar Singh to suggest making using of the dollar reserves to appreciate the rupee and bring down the rupee cost of imports. Even if an appreciation of the rupee has implications for exports and other considerations, at least in the short run it might bring some relief and that is what the RBI is understood to be trying to do now.

As for the Prime Minister’s proud assertion that "We have also taken special measures to insulate the poorer sections of our society from the full impact of rising food and fuel prices.”, should the country feel obliged for these small mercies on the “poorer sections”? And how should the "not-poorer" - the poor and not so poor sections be bailed out? Does the Government not owe any responsibility to all the people in the country?

It seems that the Government is intent upon persisting with its policy of misinforming and misleading the public, hoping that the gullible people will gulp down whatever it chooses to thrust down their gullets.

Jammu & Kashmir - Chestnuts in the Fire

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 09:09:00 +0000

The conditions in the State of Jammu & Kashmir seem to be going out of hand, with the Union Govt. not showing any purpose in its motions. For all intents and purposes, the only plan it seems to have is to let the situation cool down and hope that eventually, it can resolve the problem by talking.

That may well happen but given the passions inflamed by the Government’s actions and inaction in the last several weeks, unless the Government has the political will and the required firmness, there is a grave danger of things taking a turn for the worse. Instead of resolving a small matter related to the facilitation of pilgrims to Amarnath, the Government may find its hands full dealing with separatist elements.

Although this may not be the time to place blame, it is necessary to have a perspective on the events. The origin of the Amarnath Shrine issue is to be found largely in the political miscalculations on the part of Congress and the apparently mindless misadventure on the part of PDP. Both the parties behaved in a very myopic way on an issue which could have been resolved by discussions in the first place without the need to turn the State into a battlefield.

As far as the Central Government is concerned, although a large part of the responsibility rests with the Home Ministry, the Amarnath issue was essentially handled as a political matter and whatever was done either by the Central Government or by the Governor on directions of the Central Government was based on political decisions. These actions badly backfired and gave an opportunity not only to other political parties but also separatist elements to jump into the fray. It also made it possible for those in Jammu to give vent to their pent-up sense of frustration and turned a relatively small matter into a larger issue.

It is only hoped that the Government would not continue to act in its blundering ways but come out with some concrete solutions on its own rather than going through the motions of obtaining ideas from political parties and other organizations. It has been suggested by many that the discussions should take place amongst the members of the civil society in Jammu as well as the Valley to work out a solution. But first, the Amarnath issue needs to be resolved peacefully. For that to happen, at least one of the parties needs to be convinced to show restraint and strive for a solution rather than strife. The larger issues which have, unfortunately, come to the fore must also be handled with extreme caution and far-sightedness.

Given the record of the Government in handling difficult situations, does it appear that it has the will and the ability to do what needs to be done? Though doubtful, in the interest of the integrity of the country, it is absolutely essential that it does act to pull the chestnuts out of the fire ignited by shortsighted actions scripted or prompted by it.

Manmohan Singh - Breaking Free?

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 14:13:00 +0000

“They (the Left Parties) wanted me to behave as their bonded slave.”
- From PM's reply to the debate on the Motion of Confidence in the Lok Sabha, July 22, 2008.

The Prime Minister, fed up with constant badgering by the Left Parties on various policy issues almost from the beginning, must have heaved a sigh of relief when the fundamental differences in perceptions on the Nuclear Deal between the UPA constituents within the Government and the Left Parties became unmanageable and led to a parting of ways.

Breaking Free, really?

The separation has left the Government free to proceed with the Nuclear Deal on its own terms and in its wisdom. In theory, the Government is also now free to pursue some of the changes in economic policy which it sees as ‘essential reforms’. Whether the Government will be able to successfully bring such changes to their logical conclusion in the face of a hostile Left remains to be seen. But at least, it would now be able to bring them on the table for a wider debate, instead of being confined to the meetings of the UPA - Left Co-ordination Committee only to be summarily scuttled and vetoed.

Such perceived gains, however, have come at a heavy cost, as the Prime Minister must have already begun to realize. The huge compromises which the Congress in particular was required to make in order to win the Trust Vote in Lok Sabha have left the Party and the Government badly discredited.

As the time for rewarding all those who supported the Government comes closer, the Prime Minister and his Party will find themselves at the losing end. First of all, the Party has to show its gratitude to the main constituents like NCP, DMK and RJD by suitable gratuities in terms of positions of power or other ways of accommodation. Then, the rewards already assured to JMM have to be ensured. Some of these will inevitably mean that less will be left for the Congress Party members.

Come into my parlour....

The real problems of the Party and the Prime Minister may arise when rewarding their true saviors, the Samajwadi Party. Effectively, the SP is simply going to step into the shoes of the Left Parties. The main difference would be that whereas the Left Parties were largely concerned with policy issues, the new ally is not shy of pushing its own agenda in other matters. The SP comes with all the baggage of its past and even the man on the street knows the kind of requests they have already made and the favors they are seeking for themselves and their friends. At every step of the way, for as long as the Government lasts, the hands and fingers of this new ally will be seen guiding and goading the Government. Whether through a co-ordination committee which is now being talked about or through direct pressures, the new ally will take every opportunity to throw its weight around to gain what it wants, whatever the means the Govt. may have to adopt to grant their wishes. It only remains on the good sense of the SP how far it chooses to push the Government.

On the hand, the Prime Minister has to contend with parties like PDP and DMK who are out to play with the sensitivities of the people regardless of consequences. On the other hand are parties like RJD and SP who are openly supportive of entities which are generally regarded as anti-national. The Prime Minister may find himself increasingly caught in the vortex of such disturbing currents, not knowing how to swim against such currents.

In the reply to the debate on the Trust Vote on 22nd July 2008, the Prime Minister had said:

“When I look at the composition of the opportunistic group opposed to us, it is clear to me that the clash today is between two alternative visions of India’s future.”

Although the entire country has realized it by now, some day soon it will dawn upon Manmohan Singh too that actually it is he who, willy-nilly, is a part of the opportunistic group and his words will come to haunt him. After all, the truly opportunistic group is not one in the opposition, but one that manages to retain power by fair means or foul and whatever be the credentials of the parties forming the amalgam that is born out of compulsions to cling on to power.

The lofty talk of "visions of India's future" sounds rather incongruous at this point, to say the least, considering the events of the recent past.

The Final Shuffle of the UPA Ministerial Pack

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:04:00 +0000

The next general elections may take place sooner rather than later, considering the political situation and the serious credibility and image deficit that the present Govt. suffers from.

There is talk of impending reshuffle of the Cabinet and this may be the last chance for Manmohan Singh to shuffle the pack. Of course, the UPA is obligated to their new found allies who voted for the Govt. in the Trust Vote, and its first priority is naturally to allocate Ministries as Just Rewards to some of these allies.

At the same time if, - with a Big if - he has the courage to do so, he would do well to introduce some critical changes in the present Cabinet even at this late stage, including changing senior Ministers in key Ministries to lift the Govt.'s rapidly falling ratings.

Pranab Mukherjee, the trouble shooter

The first change he should consider is to designate Pranab Mukherjee as the Deputy Prime Minister. Throughout the crisis-ridden period of the Govt. either with the Left parties or during the events prior to the Trust Vote, Pranab has shown exemplary maturity and ability and tremendous perseverance. Despite the strong public perception of embarrassment caused to him by the statement of the Prime Minister on the Nuke Deal, while he was talking at a different pitch with the Left parties, he never flinched. Even during the Trust Vote, he made a spirited defense of the Govt. position on the Nuclear Deal to the best of his ability. If anyone deserves the position of a Deputy Prime Minister in the present Cabinet, it is he alone.

Time for newer pastures

As far as the changes of senior Ministers are concerned, the Ministries that deserve attention are Agriculture, Home and Finance, which are three key Ministries where Govt.’s failures have brought so much misery to the people.

It is a given, considering the internal security situation which has steadily deteriorated to the extent that it is now dangerously close to complete collapse, that a new Minister is long overdue in the critical Home Ministry. Sharad Pawar appears to be a possible choice, IF he agrees to move from a Ministry where he has more power. He is a seasoned Minister and he has already shown his abilities at quickly handling a potentially explosive situation in Mumbai when he was the Chief Minister in Maharashtra. If it matters, he is also from Maharashtra as Shivraj is. At the same time, his replacement in the Agriculture Ministry may be able to do at least some good even if the time available is too short. The problem would be that Pawar may not find the time to look into the affairs of the Home Ministry in view of his prior commitment to the cause of Cricket. Hopefully, at least a further deterioration in the internal security situation may be prevented by his presence at the helm. Apart from these two Ministries, it is also high time that Chidambaram is given an opportunity to try his genius in another Ministry. The Prime Minister himself can surely take additional charge of the Finance Ministry during this short but extremely critical time for the economy.

It remains to be seen how well the Prime Minister utilizes his prerogative for the last time before the elections.

Terror and the Benumbed State

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 15:04:00 +0000

Ahmedabad

Bangalore

Jaipur

Hyderabad

Malegaon

By now, all news media have given full accounts of the way terror has been stalking the country without any fear. The terrorist strikes in Bangalore and Ahmedabad on two successive days on 25th and 26th July 2008 have been condemned and the inaction of the Govt. has been strongly denounced by all the media and people at large.

And yet, the Governments of the day, whether at the State level or the Central level continue to demonstrate their impotence before and after each strike. THE STATE seems to be benumbed and to all intents and purposes continues to show scant regard not only for human lives but the threats to the very integrity and peace and harmony of the country.

For every terror strike, the primary responsibility remains that of the State Govt. and no amount of efforts to pass the buck on to the Center can diminish the responsibility of the State Governments for their failure to protect the lives and limbs of the residents of that State. The State Govt. is primarily responsible for law and order and it is the best judge of the ground conditions in the State. It is the State Govt. that has to develop its own strong intelligence network and also have an inter-state mechanism to share such intelligence. If fear has to be instilled in the would-be terrorists in the State, it is the State Govt. that is primarily in a position to do so. The State Govt.s do not appear to have any programs to provide specialized anti-terrorist training, if need be, with help from foreign countries, to its police force and create a strong cadre for such anti-terrorist operations. Nor do the State Govt.s have even a well thought out basic policy of giving monetary rewards for informants, not only after an act of terror but at all times. After all, information on suspect activities is likely to come equally from ordinary citizens as from those who are close to such activities. ( see here and here)

Therefore, in the case of Gujarat in particular, where the Gujarat Chief Minister has been daring the Terrorists all along shouting from roof tops, the blasts in Ahmedabad show that the terrorists are able to commit their anti-national acts anywhere and any time of their own choosing.

Most of the responsibility in case of the Terror attacks in Gujarat rests on the State Govt. who in over confidence and bravado has been caught napping. Unless the State Govt.s themselves develop a clear no-tolerance policy, any amount of help by the Central Govt. is bound to fail.

Twidddling Thumbs

Ministry of Home Affairs - In deep slumber

Having said all this, one must examine the total failure of the Union Home Ministry to take steps that are in its own power to take. Over the last few years the Central Govt. has shown a complete lack of sensitivity and seriousness and utter incompetence in creating an overall atmosphere that instills fear in the minds of terrorists. The firm actions taken by the USA after the terrorist attacks on its soil on Sept. 11, 2001, are there for all to see. The Govt. of India just does not have even the courage to state its policy, if there is one, on terror. If the Union Govt. is at all serious about rooting out terrorism from the country, there is nothing to stop it from taking actions which are within its own powers and if at all it has to give directions to the States on the subject, the States are bound to listen and follow. Instead of first defining its stance and policy on terror clearly, the Govt. continues to issue wish-washy statements that have ceased to carry any meaning even for the people at large, let alone the terrorist elements. The Govt. is now talking of having a federal agency. Such proliefration of new agencies will have no effect or impact because of enormous problems of co-ordination which are mainfest even within the existing agencies. The talk of such an agency is just a diversionary tactic to show that the Govt. is serious when it is not. The basic idea of the present Govt. seems to be to keep talking and going through the motions of taking actions till its time is over next year or even earlier.

All the actions or inactions of the Central Govt. so far show that far from being serious about rooting out terrorists, it actually does everything that achieves exactly the opposite and emboldens the anti-national elements.

The case of Afzal Guru is a case in point. Quite inexplicably, the Govt. has been sitting on his petition for clemency for years. There is no logical or plausible explanation, at least in the eyes of the public why the Govt. cannot take a decision. The only conclusion possible is that the Govt. has made up its mind either to grant clemency or wait to give the terrorists a suitable opportunity when they can secure the release of Afzal Guru in exchange as was done in case of other terrorists. Or, it does not have the backbone to take a logical decision of rejecting the application and would rather have a new Govt. take such a decision. In the unlikely event that it is voted in again, it is capable of sitting on the matter for as long as necessary. After all, Shivraj Patil had grandly told the Parliament that the Home Ministry sits on the petitions for an average of seven years.

No less intriguing is the absolute cussedness of the Central Govt. in not approving laws passed by certain State Legislatures, who in their wisdom think that such laws will help them to better support their own actions to tackle terrorism.

The level of intelligence gathered by the Central agencies also continues to be of poor quality and beyond giving regular cautionary advices to the States ‘crying wolf’, no specific actionable intelligence seems to be provided either to the Central Govt. or to the State Govt.

It is common knowledge that hundreds of thousands of Bangladeshis are entering the country illegally and are even able to secure official papers of residence. However, the hear-nothing, do-nothing Home Ministry does not even have an estimate or assessment of Bangladeshis entering illegally. It is common knowledge that in the commercial capital of the country Mumbai, thousands of illegal aliens were helped in getting papers by a Congress MP in the city. It is also known that some suburban areas around the periphery of Mumbai have become a favorite abode of criminal and anti national elements and so has Navi Mumbai. It is also generally recognized that many of the terrorists who have executed operations in the country in the last few years have used the Bangladesh route to enter or are Bangladeshis or have connections there.

Such incidents raise legitimate questions in the minds of the people whether the Central Govt. is deliberately taking a soft line or is simply impotent and incompetent.

The continuance of a ‘Softee’ Shivraj Patil in the position of Home Minister lends strong credence to the perception that Govt. has not grasped the seriousness of the situation. In the history of the democratic Governments in the country, a more docile and incompetent Home Minister has never been seen. In fact, he just does not seem to inspire confidence in anyone EXCEPT HIS OWN PARTY CHIEF AND, PERHAPS, THE PRIME MINISTER. His being there as the Home Minister is giving a bad name to the entire Govt. His removal from the Ministry is the badly needed first signal that the Govt. is serious and has a will to change the present state of hopeless lethargy.

The Central Government has failed utterly and completely to inspire confidence in the people that the integrity of the country is safe in its hands.

There are two options to Terror. The first is to have zero tolerance and to deal with the terrorist elements ruthlessly. The second is to do nothing, by taking the view that in a country of over a billion people, human lives have no meaning and hope and pray that the terrorists, if they are ignored, will tire themselves out. India seems to have adopted the second approach.

Winning a Trust Vote on a Black Day

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 06:31:00 +0000

22nd July, 2008 was indeed a Black Day in the history of the Lok Sabha.

For the UPA Govt. which won the Trust Vote, it was an occasion for relief and jubilation. For the record, the UPA sponsored motion was passed with a comfortable lead. Based on all calculations that were being made for days prior to the crucial day, it was going to be a close call and the Govt. could have won, if at all, only by a couple of votes. That it eventually won with a margin of 19 votes speaks volumes for the manipulative capabilities of the UPA and its new found allies. In fact, were it not for the new rescuers and saviors of the UPA, it is doubtful if the vote could have been won at all.

Basking in the glory of victory,

under the shadow of ignominious actions

Unparalleled conduct
This was one Trust Motion that has no parallel in history in so far as the brazen and shameless deployment of money power adopted to engineer a win is concerned. That monetary consideration, ministerial appointments, election tickets and other forms of inducement were deployed liberally was known to the people soon after the date of the vote was set. There is no smoke without fire and in the days prior to the vote, the atmosphere was filled up with such sickeningly dense smoke that the entire country could realize that a fire was raging. With the MDEs (Masters of Defection Engineering) of the UPA and its new ally running amuck and throwing all caution to the winds, they approached scores of persons who had the power to vote against the Govt.

In the stable

It is just too far fetched for anyone to believe that those in favor of whom the vote was being sought were blissfully unaware of what was going on. The efforts of those who worked to ensure a victory in the face of defeat admirably succeeded. If those who voted for the Motion or abstained in defiance of the Whips of their parties had actually followed the party Whips, the Govt. would have lost by nearly the same margin with which it won the vote.

Show me Proof
Sardar Manmohan Singh, when asked the previous evening a pointed question on the talk of money being offered, bluntly asked for ‘proof’ as is done by many hardened politicians, knowing full well that such activities are hardly conducted in broad daylight and receipts and agreements exchanged between the parties. And yet, it was already known that the JMM chief was assured of Ministries and other goodies during his meetings with the PM and the chairperson of the UPA. The proof of that pudding will be there for everyone to see in the next couple of weeks. Then, during the crucial debate on the Motion, agitated BSP MPs were on their feet claiming pressures from CBI to vote in favor of the Govt.

Disgust and revulsion

To cap it all, just as Abani Roy was about to finish his long speech, three MPs from the BJP produced in the Lok Sabha bundles of notes totaling to Rs. one crore, which they claimed to have received as advance in return for their promises to abstain. Their allegation was promptly denied and pooh-poohed by the UPA including those whose names were mentioned by the MPs. It would, perhaps, have been tactically more advisable for the BJP MPs to meet the Speaker in his chamber to produce before him the money with their explanations. Be that as it may, it is now for the Speaker to take a decision. The Black Day that began with the allegations by the BSP and BJP MPs eventually ended with the vote going in favor of the UPA due to several opposition MPs voting in favor of or abstaining from the vote. All right thinking persons were filled with a sense of disgust and revulsion, not because the money was produced in the Lok Sabha for the whole world to watch, but because it showed to the whole world the murky depths to which some people were going in trying to secure votes in favor of the Motion.

The aftermath
The Speaker of the Lok Sabha has asked the MPs to file formal complaints by a communication in late evening on the 23rd. The tapes of recordings of some of the details of the dealings of the agents from the UPA with the three MPs were finally handed over to the Speaker by the TV Channel that co-operated with the MPS in a sting operation, but only on the 23rd afternoon after an unexplained delay. It is still unclear as to what, if anything, has been decided by the Speaker with regard to the complaint by the BSP members. As was to be expected, those who induced some BJP MPs to vote in favor of the Govt. have also encouraged one of them to file a tit-for-tat complaint against BJP leadership for trying to kill him!

It now falls upon the Speaker to take several key decisions viz. regarding the disqualification of MPs who defied party whips, the investigation into allegations by the BSP MPs and the BJP MPs. Somnath Chatterjee is a senior and highly regarded parliamentarian. He has an avowed aversion to one of the Parties whose MPs have complained to him, to the extent of making his aversion an issue worth compromising his Party's position on substantive issues. He has also been disowned by his Party that now sits in opposition. But he is an honourable gentleman and knows fully well his crucial responsibility to restore the faith of the people which is badly shaken up. He occupies the Chair of the Speaker which is non-partisan and he will surely take the right decisions quickly in order to enhance the prestige of the High Office.

Whatever be the outcome of the actions of the Speaker, one thing is sure. Those who talk in legalese asking for proof or claim that they are being wrongly maligned or say that 'let the law take its course' should understand that the people's court does not work in the way that the law courts do. People have seen, heard, read and understood what has transpired in the run up to the vote. Protestations and proclamations of innocence have no meaning in the light of what people already know. For the people, what means most is the immorality of it all, regardless of whether those who committed this perfidy on democracy can ever be brought to book under law or not.

And finally it is also hoped that, Manmohan Singh, a man of impeccable integrity and with the supreme national interest of the country always at heart, will reflect deeply upon his victory. Just as he asked the MPs to vote according to their conscience he will, hopefully, also ask his own conscience whether what he has won was worth the serious dent to his image that he has undoubtedly suffered. For the present, it does appear that he has adjusted himself to his surroundings even if that means lowering the high standard of probity that he might have once had. He also seems to be rejoicing for the moment, having fulfilled a solemn promise that he made to the U.S. President some time back. At least on that score he has convinced himself that the end justified the means.

Democracy shall survive, despite all efforts to subvert it.

Inflation – Not the last straw on the back yet

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 15:36:00 +0000

It appears that the Govt. considers the Aam Admi of India as the beast of burden with the strongest back. By failing to manage the developing inflation situation with enough sensitivity and alertness and blaming it on everything else but its own actions and inactions, the Govt. seems to be trying to test the endurance of that pack animal to the utmost. However, knowing that worse may be yet to come, the shocking high of Inflation at 11.05% for the week ended 7th June 2008 may well not be the last straw yet to break the back of the Camel called Aam Admi.

For the record
The Inflation at 11.05% is at a 13 year high.

Between 29th Dec.2007 and 7th June 2008, it has gone up from 3.8 % to 11.05 % i.e. by 7.22 %. This is 291% of Dec. 2007.

In last one week, the inflation increased by 2.3 % from 8.75 % to 11.05%, i.e. by 26 % over previous week.

Around 1.2 % out of the 2.3 % is accounted for by the increase in the group Fuel, Power, Light and Lubricants.(Index of this group went up from 7.90 % in previous week to 16.25 % i.e. by 8.35 %. With a weight of 14.22624 % the impact is 1.19 % in the total increase of 2.3 %)

In the householder’s expenses diary, the actual increase in his day-to-day necessities is over 30%, nearly three times higher than the WPI inflation even before the diesel and LPG price increases.

The overall inflation continues to be alarming and there is a serious risk of escalation, unless the rain Gods help, as they normally do when Governments fail to do their job well.

The responsibility
The Finance Minister had said just a few months back during his budget speech, rather immodestly albeit in a lighter vein in the context of high revenue growth that “having a lucky Finance Minister may have also helped!” It seems that luck is not helping as far as inflation is concerned.

In seriousness, the Govt. as a whole as well as the parties that are part of or supporting the Govt. must surely take responsibility for the situation. But it is not fair to place the blame fully on the entire Govt. or the Prime Minister. Two of the Prime Minister’s men in particular hold the largest responsibility for having let down the Prime Minister in this regard.

Chidambaram

Main Hoon Naa..

Sharad Pawar, President of BCCI

The first is P. Chidambaram, the Sage of Sivaganga camping in the Finance Ministry. The second is Sharad Pawar, the President of BCCI and President-in-waiting of the ICC, who happens to be holding additional charge of the Agriculture Ministry.

Chidambaram, cocky and conceited with little pretense of humility, as those who deal with him including colleagues describe him, has to bear a good part of the responsibility for the current situation. With his obsession for GDP growth, Stock Exchange Indices and a keen desire to win approbation of foreign investors for the wonderful earning opportunities his policies were giving them, he got so carried away as to become unmindful of what was happening on the ground. As he gleefully went about proclaiming high growth of GDP, rising Sensex indices, foreign investment inflows and increasing tax revenues, he came to believe that the Aam Admi was so much the happier and grateful for these achievements. No doubt, some good work that he has done under the guidance of the Prime Minister should not be overlooked. But for the people at large, what counts is the real impact the Govt.’s policies have on their lives. The wonderful dreams of a good life after a few visits to modern shopping malls quickly turn illusory and short lived happiness evaporates when the money in the pocket buys less and less with each passing day.

Even the Prime Minister brought this point home when, on one occasion he said,”Merely because the external profile of our economy is robust does not mean that we can neglect domestic challenges in fiscal management.”

Montek Singh of the Planning Commission had earlier observed in March 2007 “Overheating of the economy was a reflection of the fact that the demand for goods was pushing ahead of capacity in certain sectors. This, in turn, was leading to the rise in prices.” It just seems to be a problem of too much money chasing too few goods.

Chidambaram seems to have taken an approach that favors encouraging more and more consumption without ensuring the supply side. At every opportunity he is trying to boost consumer spending and losing sight of the implications of trying to do so. For example, in end of 2006, the Govt. was actually considering a reduction in the duties on large cars that would surely have encouraged more and more people to buy large cars with high petrol consumption. Thankfully, this did not happen and, in fact, recently the Govt. was forced to increase duty on large cars. But recently, he suddenly thought of making India a global hub for making small cars. He reduced the duty on small cars to encourage more people to buy and apart from straining the inadequate infrastructure, increase petrol consumption significantly relative to public transport. He is trying to encourage more cars in the country ostensibly to make India a global hub! He has also been pressurizing banks to reduce interest on loans for consumer durables, trying to induce people to buy things today with tomorrow’s income, to sustain his high growth plank.

These are only instances to show that apart from tackling the immediate issue of inflation, it is time to have a serious and deeper look at the direction of Govt. policies. The growth that is being achieved seems to be tenuous and the economy quite vulnerable to even minor hiccups.

Chidambaram, it seems has been losing sight of larger issues in the pursuit of his own fixations. In doing so, even after fully visualizing the potential for high inflation, he failed to be alert or ignored warning signs and perhaps did not even think that anything could go wrong. And when inflation took off, he virtually presented a sense of inevitability about it blaming it on this and that.

Castles in the air

As regards Sharad Pawar, during his time in the Ministerial chair, the country has suffered considerably in agriculture with no worthwhile initiatives coming from him to maintain food security with the result that despite record production, the prices of food articles are showing continuous increase.

The situation of agriculture, the base of our economy, has been going from bad to worse. The food crisis being faced is the worst in thirty years. The per capita availability of food grains is back to the 1970s’ levels. An expert like Dr. Swaminathan was forced to observe that stagnation in output is a public policy failure. Whether it is availability of fertilizers or procurement or production, the story is one of lack of due attention and purposeful long term actions. The PM had been cautioning Pawar for the past three years about a food crunch staring the country in the face. Even Chidambaram has been making repeated references to the food situation and supply side issues in his budget speeches and elsewhere. The country’s food security has gone for a toss. Yet, just in March 2008, he told the Lok Sabha that "except for pulses, the country would remain self-sufficient in food grains during the 11th Plan period”. Even taking his statement at face value, what has been done for pulses and edible oils? Are these products not part of the food security?

The problems were aggravted by resorting to unwarranted high cost imports of wheat that turned out to be rotten, the cost of which has to be borne by the people. It is yet another indication that the Govt. considers the Aam Admi as a pack animal who can also be fed on rotten food grains. Incidentally, it is not known whether the Govt. has officially sought compensation from the supplier for the rotten shipments and, if so, whether it has come in the Govt. kitty. Justifying the imports, he had said that import of agriculture products did not make anyone happy but the government has to resort to them to create "strategic reserve"!! Or, was it shortfall in procurement?

When there are problems, he firmly believes in the adage “Money makes the mare (or stallion) to go”. For every problem, characteristically Pawar thinks of money as the solution and his easy answer is that of providing monetary sops or compensation, thus temporarily pushing back a problem instead of finding a lasting change. Should the rain gods play truant, he may well sing what he learnt as a toddler: “Yere, yere, paoosa, tula deto paisa(Come, come, O Rain, I will give you money)” Though he is himself largely responsible for the farmers’ distress in the first place by having failed to address the problems of agriculture and the farmers, Pawar went about town claiming credit for the huge loan write-offs. Rather than realizing that he has a responsibility for the huge cost of Rs.71,000 crores, he has been trying to derive political mileage out of the Govt.’s moral compulsion to alleviate the farmers’ plight. If anyone should get credit for the write-off, it is the people of the country, the famous pack animals that will bear the burden.

For his inability to do much in his Ministry, Pawar may take shelter of his preoccupation with cricket. Ever since he was defeated in Sept. 2004 in the BCCI presidential elections, he has been fully immersed in the BCCI, at first to avenge his defeat and then in its management and introducing the money spinning 20 overs game. His focus on cricket is continuing, by trying to become the President of the ICC. If he says that cricket has not diverted his attention and that he has been fully involved in carrying out his responsibilities in Govt., his position becomes more untenable as he has little to show for it.

Excuses, Blame Games and Buck passing
Ever since the Govt. was caught napping and woke up from its dream sequence, it became the first priority for those in Govt. to frantically search for excuses rather than taking urgent actions to check the inflation. In their desperation to offer the public some palatable reasons for the surging inflation and for being remiss in taking actions, they came up with different versions and started saying things that were only unbelievable, even farcical. Many of the lame excuses and contrived explanations may eventually find their way into political joke books.

In the early stages, the Govt. glibly assured the people that steps were being taken and that inflation will come down soon. As it became clear from their subsequent explanations, the Govt. actually knew that the problem was going to last for quite some time. All along, Chidambaram has kept on uttering inanities and platitudes like “India has been able to contain inflationary expectation”, “steps will be taken to moderate, contain and reverse headline inflation” “inflation is worrisome” etc. He even said once, “The rise is not statistically significant”. He should know that what matters more is psychological significance in the minds of the people, rather than statistical significance.

Starting their excuses Chidambaram asserted that inflation was occurring in other countries too. Well, inflation happens in all countries and some have low inflation while some others have higher inflation. Such comparisons cannot be used at will as justification for high inflation in our own economy. The inflation in each country is determined by a host of factors to which it is subject and if it is higher in some countries than in India, it gives no solace to the people. Such misleading and fallacious reasoning does not wash.

Thereafter, they started saying that the rising prices of oil were responsible for the rise in inflation, trying to confuse people into believing that the inflation was primarily due to this reason. It is a fact that the rising oil prices will impact inflation to the extent that it exclusively affects prices including those of downstream products. It is understandable that no one has control at present on oil prices and that it is a serious issue, but the entire blame for the inflation being placed on oil prices is not understandable. This also raises the question that as the oil price has been rising for some time; did the Govt. not see its impact on the inflation coming? Chidambaram should also answer as to why did he reduce duties on cars that would lead to increased consumption at the same time and even as oil prices were rising and the long term situation appeared uncertain?

Another explanation given is that the country being part of globalization could not be insulated from what was happening globally and it was importing inflation through imports of goods. This may be true only to the extent that the country is reliant upon imports. But several questions arise. What is the proportion of basic imports in our total consumption and what is the actual incidence of the increased cost on the overall Index comprising of 435 products? Why does the country still have to import agricultural products including wheat, reminding people of the PL 480 imports of the 1950s, and that too rotten wheat? Again, why did the Govt. not take prior actions to reduce duties on imported products like edible oils to soften domestic prices? And what is the relevance of globalization to the prices of eggs, milk and vegetables?

The next words of wisdom from PC were that GDP growth and low inflation could not go hand in hand. ”We cannot have Inflation control measures and GDP growth at the same time.” he told Rajya Sabha on 16th April 2008. "The choice is clear. If we want to check inflation, we must be prepared for a slightly lower rate of growth,". This is true to some extent but raises disturbing questions. It shows that the Govt. was always aware that inflation would rise substantially when planning for a high GDP growth. Did the Govt. not consider what would be a desirable balance between GDP growth and Inflation? It shows also that it did not take any preemptive steps on inflation simply hoping rather irresponsibly that it would not happen. Furthermore, granted that the Govt. and the experts are aware of a relationship between GDP growth and inflation, what about the Aam Admi? Did the people have a chance to choose between high growth and an adverse impact on their day-to-day existence? And if high GDP growth inevitably means high inflation, then where is the relevance of global factors which was the first excuse?

Another reason he gave was the heavy inflows of foreign funds through FDI, FII, private equity, remittances, export earnings, ECBs, etc. What has all along been considered a virtue and an achievement is now being seen as a contributor to the rising inflation.

With Chidambaram continuing to proffer his explanations, Minister Kamal Nath bluffed on 15th April, “I don’t see inflation going up; I see it coming down soon,”.

At some stage during this time, the chorus of excuses inevitably shifted to the previous Govt. and comparison between “what happened in their time and what they did and what we are doing” - a thoroughly immature piece of argument! In order to ensure an 'inclusive blame' game (like 'inclusive growth') the States, especially the non-Congress States, were next made the scapegoats. Everyone from PM to Sonia Gandhi to Pawar blamed States. They also blamed hoarders, forgetting that hoarding is a result of anticipated or actual shortages not vice versa. If there are no shortages existing or foreseen, hoarders have little incentive to hoard.

When nothing seemed to work, the Prime Minister and other worthies in his party started saying “there is no magic wand”, a catch phrase that was also used earlier in February 2007 in similar circumstances by the Congress Party.

Sharad Pawar, the second lead role, was at first casual and when questioned as to when the inflation would halt or come down, he said, “I do not have (any) idea, I am not (an) astrologer”. Later on, he said that prices in other countries were higher than in India, using the same argument used by Mrs. Indira Gandhi decades back in relation to sky rocketing price of sugar. On May 3, he told Parliament that “in countries like Vietnam, Thailand and Pakistan, there is an increase of over 100 percent in the prices of rice and wheat, while in India the prices of rice and wheat have increased by 17.2 percent and 7.2 percent respectively. It is the minimum in the world.” On what basis did he chose these three countries and what does the situation in these three hand-picked countries have to do with the rising prices in India?

Further, attributing inflation in the country to global foodgrain crisis, Pawar blamed the sharp rises in prices of wheat and edible oil because many countries have started cultivating grains like corn and shifted oils towards production of bio fuel. He also proclaimed "Being an integral part of the global economy, it is but natural that world market will have an impact on the domestic price line. The government, however, due to its proactive polices, has been able to insulate the Indian market to a very great extent. Rising petroleum prices and increasing cost of farming have resulted in costlier food grain availability.” Much of this is just poppycock without much substance as basically if the reasons are true, it shows that the Govt. was aware of all this before and did nothing.

Giving internal reasons, he said that the North Indians are now eating rice also while South Indians are eating more chapatis and due to this change in food habits, the situation has worsened. Some days after the "change in use pattern" excuse, Kamal Nath the Minister for Promotion of Luxury Imports and Patron for foreign retailers, went a step further implicitly accusing the poor of eating two square meals a day instead of one meal before. Did this realization dawn upon the Govt. only when inflation started hurting the Aam Admi and excuses had to be invented? If the Govt. was already aware of the changing food pattern and worried about people eating two meals a day, what did it do? Why does it claim now that there is no shortage? “There was no plan to import as there was ample availability backed by bumper production.”

More hilarious justification from Pawar was yet to come: On a TV program he said, “yesterday I was watching a program on TV where they are showing that even in USA there is a shortage of some food items” The reference was to a TV clip where a US store which had temporarily run out of stocks was restricting individual shoppers to a certain quantity. This had nothing to do with any US-wide shortage, just a problem in a particular store. Strangely, he appeared to be justifying shortage in India while according to him there is no shortage.

On 23.4, he promised to "write to Chief Ministers for reducing value added tax (VAT) and mandi tax on agricultural commodities in their respective States to bring down the prices,", a clear effort to shift blame. If these taxes were indeed responsible for inflation, why did he have to wait till inflation surged ahead?

While the Govt. has taken several actions, they appear to be a result of knee-jerk reactions and panic driven rather than according to any well-thought out plan. In the panic that followed, the Govt. came up with some unconventional solutions too. In fact, at one stage in sheer helplessness, they started talking of artificial controls that were prevalent in yester years and long since given up.

The PM at a CII meet in which he requested the members to assist in Govt.'s efforts by taking various measures, also made a moral call to introduce a ”measure of sobriety in corporate lifestyles and accept reduced compensation to cut costs and maintain price levels, self imposed ceilings on salaries and expenditure.” While pleading with the corporate high fliers to tone down their life styles, he seemed to have forgotten that his deputies the FM and Commerce Minister have been trying all along to encourage a spendthrift lifestyle to artificially boost demand.

The Govt. continues to threaten action against steel and cement makers and referring them to the Competition Commission but has done nothing in this direction. Lalu Prasad the rustic genius, who blamed the 6th Pay Commission for the price rise, offered his own brand of solution saying that Railways won’t load grains for private parties, a wholly arbitrary and illegal action.

As the measures taken so far have so far not yielded much and realising that problem may not be capable of quick resolution, the buck passing has begun in right earnest. Earlier on 18th June, Chidambaram had said, "Inflation is high. RBI must take steps and it has taken,". Again on 22nd, the Finance Ministry said”We expect the Central Bank to take some more action. It is for the RBI to take a decision and do so when it is appropriate” putting the onus on RBI and washing its hands off.

When the index rise of 2.3 % came on the 20th, deftly trying to shift the blame on the Cabinet, Chidambaram said, “we had cautioned the cabinet of the impact on inflation if petroleum prices were revised” as if he was opposed to the price rise and the jump in inflation was attributable to the Cabinet. In fact, at the time of revision in petroleum product prices, he was the one who kept on refusing to yield till the end on reducing duties on petroleum products.

Pawar’s NCP adopted an economic resolution calling upon Finance Minister P. Chidambaram and the Reserve Bank of India to take “more stringent measures” to contain inflation. An AICC press statement tried to set the record straight on the agricultural stuation and said “A combination of demand, supply constraints has resulted in low buffer stocks and record prices. What can, however, save India from the menace of food-related inflation, most experts believe, are augmented investments and better agricultural policies,” Not to be outdone, Pawar recently followed up on his blame-placing, A press report dated 20th June said, "In the wake of the unprecedented rise in inflation graph, Agriculture Minister Sharad pawar on Friday had telephonic talks with Finance Minister P Chidambaram and asked him to take immediate steps.”

This charade will continue for some time. Once the situation is brought under control, hopefully, the Sage from Sivaganga will retreat to his abode to contemplate till the next elections and hopefully, Sharad Pawar, once he becomes ICC President, will opt to shift to London where he may also have a chance to spend his hard earned money in peace, having already worked out the succession plan for his party.

The prognosis for the near future is none too bright. Apart from oil prices, the falling rupee and internal factors will also continue to keep up the level of inflation. If the Govt. is unable to handle the situation in a purposeful way, there may be serious consequences on the economy. Hopefully, sooner or later the rate of inflation will come down. Sadly, even after that happens, the prices which have risen will never come down to the earlier levels and the people of this country will have to continue to carry the burden on their backs.

For the next Goverment, the two important lessons are: to be on top of the situations at all times as they develop and not to insult the people who have elected them to serve, by inventing excuses for failure to act diligently, as the present Govt. is doing.

Anything for the High Life...

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Mon, 19 May 2008 00:55:00 +0000

In the din and frenzy of inflation that is searing the Aam Admi, certain significant comments by Kamal Nath, the Commerce Minister appear to have gone unnoticed.

De-facto Minister for Promotion of Luxury Imports - at a 2007 Conference

Kamal Nath, speaking at a Luxury Conference on 28th March 2008, declared that the government was planning to increase foreign direct investment in single-brand retailing. While this comment could be seen as a continuance of his pet theme of promoting the Cause of Foreign Retailers and Imported Luxury Products, his further comments sound quite strange.

He said that “The government could reduce import taxes of high-end luxury goods. We do have high tariffs so we are looking at rationalizing these. We also have to differentiate between high-end and low-end luxury goods.” Kamal Nath said India could look at the tariff model which was applicable to wines and spirits where high value products are subjected to lower duty. Propounding his rationale, he said that India may reduce import duties on luxury products to stem revenue losses from luxury brands bought by Indians traveling abroad. “India has high tariffs and we recognise that if you go abroad and buy, then the country loses revenues. Therefore, we are working on both duties and countervailing duties.” He said he had forwarded proposals for duty cuts to the finance ministry. He further added: India is unwilling to reduce tariffs on low-cost imports, which can hit its own industries.

His talk of reducing import duty on high-end luxury products appears to be quite bizarre, to say the least. Let us examine his quixotic idea and his incomprehensible rationale.

First of all, he said that Govt. was losing revenue from luxury goods bought by Indian traveling abroad. What revenue is he talking about? Is it Customs Duty? Imports by Indians traveling abroad are governed by the Baggage Rules which, broadly speaking; allow import of up to Rs. 25,000 per passenger subject to some further restrictions e.g. max. 2 liters of spirits and alcohol. Everything above this level is dutiable. So, when Kamal Nath talks of revenue loss when Indians buy luxury goods abroad and bring them into the country, does he imply that the Customs Dept. lets them import anything they wish without duty, either due to lax control or otherwise? And, if at all there is revenue loss due to the duty free limit, should this not be the worry for Finance Ministry which determines the limit after due consideration and consultations? What does he, as the Commerce Minister have to do with this?

Could he be thinking of domestic revenue loss assuming the same products were imported in bulk at a low duty and sold in the country by the foreign entities involved in single-brand retailing? If that be so, then also the issue of revenue loss is not his concern as Commerce Minister. Perhaps, then, his real objective is only to promote large imports of Luxury products by the foreign retailers at low import duties. The revenue loss rationale is just a bogey.

Secondly, what is the logic in saying that high end products require less duties and low end require more duties? He does not want duties to be reduced for low-priced products on the ground that it will swamp the local markets with cheap imports from countries like China and hit the country’s own industry. That argument may carry its own logic. What it does mean, though, is that Western countries whose branded products are expensive should get the benefit of low duties. If similar products can be supplied by others at lower prices, they should suffer higher duties. The higher the price, the lower the duty, because those charging higher prices need to have higher profits - simple.This is turning the principle of equity and fairness on its head. How can a govt. that encourages its ministers to use such concepts to promote luxury products be called a govt. that cares for Aam Admi?

(see more details of these luxuries here)

Thirdly, exactly which products does he have in mind for the reduction in import duty? India’s duty structure is no longer what it was ten years back and today it is in full compliance of its WTO obligations as regards maximum duty tariffs. Most of the products, even consumer products whether high end or low end, carry a basic duty of just 10%. A few products which do have a basic duty of over 30% are:

Cars, Motorbikes etc. – 100%. However, it is absurd to think that Indians travelling abroad would buy them there and bring them into the country as returning travellers without paying duty.

( see more details of these luxuries here or here)

Apparel – Here, although the basic duty is just 10%, there are minimum specific duties. The highest minimum duty is in the case of men's suits being Rs. 1,100 per piece. This could hardly be termed as high and deserving to be reduced for the so-called ‘high-end’ products which in any case, would be subject to the 10% duty.

Alcoholic Beverages – Wines carry a high duty of 150%. Whisky which was brought down from a high of 182% following a dispute with EU and USA, still carries a duty of 150%.

Food products – All food products including food grains, edible oils, tea, coffee etc. carry higher rates of duty between 30% and 100%. Pet foods have a lower duty of 20% under a dispensation given by the Finance Minister.

So were Food Products were on the Minister’s mind for duty reduction? In his wisdom, the Minister might have already realised in the month of March, the developing situation that would make food products the real luxuries for the Aam Admi!

Or products made out of food grains, say, whisky? Exactly a year ago in May 2007, the country’s top distillery group of Vijay Mallya acquired Whyte & Mackay, one of the producers of Scotch whisky for $ 1.2 bn. One of the prime reasons for acquiring this distiller with a capacity of 40 million liters was to exploit the Indian market where Mallya holds a sound position. The success of the acquisition, therefore, depends in no small measure on the reduction in the import duty structure, especially for import of the Scotch concentrate. Is this a product on the Minister’s mind then?

Or is he simply trying to vie with the Finance Minister in announcing give-aways for promoting the high life? It will be remembered that this Finance Minister recently announced, quite unnecessarily, a reduction in excise duty on small cars, completely unmindful of the disastrous impact it may have on the stressed infrastructure. Earlier in Dec. 2006, this Govt. was also reported to be considering a duty reduction on large cars applying some perverse logic!

Jack Russels - favorites of Very Important Persons... at the school of petcare

The same Finance Minister of this country with a GDP of $ 1.16 trillion and central revenues of $ 177 billion, had grandly announced in his Budget Speech last year, a decision of great consequence for the country: “I have good news for cat and dog lovers. I propose to reduce the duty on pet foods from 30 per cent to 20 per cent.”

Distinctly refined tastes

All this is written here just to place things in context and show this Govt.’s sense of priorities.

It is a Govt. that truly cares - FOR THE CREAMY LAYER

Anything to please .......

The AIIMS (Amendment) Act 2007 - from farce to fiasco

noreply@blogger.com (Lokadhikar) — Sat, 10 May 2008 06:27:00 +0000

What a sad reflection on the way Bharat, that is India, is being run!

At the center of this latest episode that highlights the capricious ways of functioning of the present Govt. of India is Dr. A. Ramadoss, the Union Minister for Health & Family Welfare.

I shall teach him a lesson.

Dr. A. Ramadoss

Dr. Ramadoss is one of the Tughlaqs in the present Government. During his tenure as a Minister in the Union Cabinet, he has shown a remarkable ability to think and act in ways that displays a sheer lack of maturity. Many of his utterances and actions have invited ridicule or landed the Govt. repeatedly in the Courts. (See here, here and here) His Ministry has tied itself into knots trying to execute some of his ideas, having had to repeatedly modify or defer the implementation of half-baked rules framed at his behest.

On 8th May 2008, the Supreme Court of India struck down a provision in the All India Institute of Medical Sciences & the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (Amendment) Act, 2007. -AIIMS (Amendment) Act, 2007 for short. Even by the most charitable interpretation, this Judgment is a serious blow to the Union Govt.’s slapdash approach to the serious business of governance.

The events leading to the present fiasco have been known since a long time by the Government comprising of the Cabinet as well as the Babus, the Parliamentarians and even the public-at-large, thanks to regular media coverage of the machinations of Dr. Ramadoss in this matter.

AIIMS

Dr. P. Venugopal

From the time he began interfering in the affairs of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), the Minister had made it evident that the Director of AIIMS, Dr. P. Venugopal, an internationally renowned cardio-vascular surgeon, was a thorn in his flesh that had to be removed. Soon after he got interested in the affairs of AIIMS, he came to the conclusion that the Institute was not functioning in the way it should and Dr. Venugopal was identified by him as the person who was to be held responsible and sacked. During this time, the quota agitation in April 2006 also affected AIIMS with the resident doctors joining the fray to protest against the proposed reservations for OBC. Rightly or wrongly, Dr. Venugopal was perceived to be tacitly supporting the agitation in AIIMS, further strengthening the Minister’s determination.

Having been totally consumed by the desire to teach Dr. Venugopal a lesson, the Minister used every possible device to pressurize and hound him out, an effort which saw the Govt. getting involved in the Courts time and again. When nothing worked, he convinced the Union Cabinet to amend the AIIMS Act with the sole objective of removing the Director in the garb of formulating a policy in accordance with the directions of the Delhi High Court in a Public Interest Litigation. The Union Cabinet, in its wisdom or lack of it, decided to go along with Dr. Ramadoss and presented the Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha in August 2007. Even a misleading picture was given to the Parliament in the Statement of Objects & Reasons for the Bill.

A fair idea of the stratagems adopted by the Minister was presented by Mrs. Maneka Gandhi (BJP/NDA) in the Lok Sabha during the debate on the AIIMS (Amendment) Bill. The good Minister’s side as presented by himself and another member Dr. Karan Singh Yadav (Congress/UPA) is also found in the debate.

During the Lok Sabha debate, Mr. Braja Kishore Tripathy (BJD/NDA) repeatedly drew attention of the House to the fact that the Bill was unconstitutional and liable to be struck down. He said: “If you approve this thing, tomorrow, it would be declared unconstitutional by the court. So, should we be ignorant like this and approve this? That is my point and I am just trying to draw the attention of the entire House to know the provision of law. The same would be declared unconstitutional in the light of law laid down by the Supreme Court in a number of cases.” But, Mr. Das Munshi (Congress/UPA) made it “abundantly clear that this UPA Government is not against any individual. We are streamlining the policy only.” The Bill was passed after a walk out by members opposing the Bill. In the short debate in Rajya Sabha, the CPI as well as CPIM, self-appointed conscience-keepers of the UPA also unequivocally supported the Bill.

The Bill became law on 30th Nov. 2007. On the same day, Dr. Venugopal was removed but he challenged in the Supreme Court, the provision of the amending Act under which he was removed. On 8th May 2008, the Supreme Court struck down as ultra vires and unconstitutional, the very provision in the Amendment Act under which Dr. Venugopal was sacked. The Supreme Court further directed that:

“..the writ petitioner shall serve the nation for some more period, i.e., upto 2nd of July 2008. We direct the AIIMS Authorities to restore the writ petitioner in his office as Director of AIIMS till his period comes to an end on 2nd of July 2008. The writ petitioner is also entitled to his pay and other emoluments as he was getting before premature termination of his office from the date of his order of termination.”

In the course of its Judgment, the Court observed: "…. the Parliament does not seem to have been apprised about the pendency of the proceedings before the Delhi High Court and this Court and declaration made and directions issued by the Delhi High Court at different stages." It is worth noting that the Delhi High Court Judgment dated 29th March 2007 had held that Dr. Venugopal was entitled to continue as Director up to 2nd of July 2008 and issued a Writ of Mandamus that premature termination could only be made for justifiable reasons and in compliance with the principles of natural justice. The conclusion of the Supreme Court was clear that the proviso to sub-section (1A) of Section 11 of the Act was only intended for Dr. Venugopal when it said: Such an impermissible over classification through a one man legislation clearly falls foul of Article 14 of the Constitution being an apparent case of “naked discrimination” in our democratic civilized society governed by Rule of Law and renders the impugned proviso as void, ab initio and unconstitutional.

Can there be a greater indictment of the Government’s actions?

This was an amendment initiated by one single individual to act against one other individual. No one in the Union Cabinet could have been ignorant of the goings on in this matter for well over an year, before the proposed amendment Bill was brought before it. The Union Cabinet knew very well that a particular part of the amendment bill was tailor-made solely to sack the Director of AIIMS at the whims of a single Minister, a relatively junior Minister at that.

The Union Cabinet could not have been unaware that the particular provision would run afoul of the Constitution, particularly as there were precedents in the Judgments of the Supreme Court in similar matters. It is inconceivable also that the Cabinet was so badly advised by the officials in the Ministries of Health and Law that they did not point out to the judgment of the Delhi High Court dated 29th March 2007 and the Writ of Mandamus issued against the Govt. It is abundantly clear, therefore, that in approving this Bill for presentation to the Parliament, the Govt. knowingly threw all caution to the wind in completely ignoring the law and failed to maintain the high norms of probity expected of it. It presented a Bill to the Parliament concealing facts and misleading it. Similarly, even the Parliamentarians were aware all the time about the true intent of the amendment Bill. And yet, the Parliament passed the Bill.

The issue then is, that had it not been for the fight of principles carried on by the person affected by the amendment, the people would have remained mute spectators to the manner in which the Govt. of the country manipulated the legislative powers and the entire system to remove just one individual from office only a few months before his term was to end. It was as if that one person was the enemy of the entire Government. Sadly, even the Parliamentarians allowed themselves to acquiesce in this blatant subversion of the Rule of Law.

The lesson is that even in India of the 21st Century, Governments pretending to look after “supreme national interests” can and will continue to behave in an arbitrary manner and take subjective, suspect actions and abuse their power, whenever they think that ‘no one is looking’. The only solution against such tendencies that weaken Democracy is for the people at large to be alert.

For the Government, this incident may not be the last one to bring it discredit. Some of the actions of the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare are already before the Courts and as long as Dr. Ramadoss is allowed to have his way as a spoiled child, it may well be that the Govt. will keep getting more egg on its face.