July 14, 2010, governancenow.com
SC directive would increase clamour for more quota
There is no escape from the reservation genie. The Supreme Court has, by allowing Tamil Nadu and Karnataka to continue with their 69 percent and 73 percent quotas, respectively, for another year, created an opportunity for other states to exceed the 50 percent ceiling that it had laid down earlier in the Indira Sawhney case in 1992. The apex court has now asked these two state governments to provide quantifiable data on the OBC population to their backward commissions to justify their quotas.
Should these states do so, which they would probably do given the fact that their quota system is in place for decades, more states would jump into the bandwagon. The Rajasthan government, for example, is waiting in the wings. A couple of years ago it had enacted a law to provide five percent reservation to the Gujjars but this law was kept in abeyance because it led to exceeding the 50 percent cap.
There is no reason why the states shouldn’t give reservation beyond 50 percent so long as the principle of providing reservation and the principle of proportional representation are upheld. A 50 percent ceiling is arbitrary in any case and the apex court’s latest directive only confirms that.
The task for the government is now well cut out. First and foremost, it should go ahead with the caste census to find out the proportional representation of the OBCs and other castes that benefit or should benefit from the affirmative action of the state.
The second task would be to go for a bottom-up reservation policy. This would mean, reservation right from the time of admission to the nursery or KG classes. That would ensure that the students from the SCs, STs and the OBCs don’t have problem of coping with the curriculum when they are pitch-forked to the IITs, IIMs and other institutions of higher learning and centres of excellence.
Once the grounding is done in terms of education, and done well, these students would probably not need a quota in higher education. They would be able to compete on equal footing. That would also put less pressure when it comes to finding employment or seeking promotion in job, be it in the public sector or the private sector.
But this will call for a massive planning to expand quality education throughout the country. The Right to Education Act needs to be remodeled to ensure this. But this has to be a long-term planning, not the one that former HRD minister Arjun Singh attempted when he introduced reservation in the IITs and IIMs and wanted these institutions to expand their capacity by one-third in three years to cop with the situation. Shortcuts, particularly the populist ones, will create their own problems as has been witnessed in these institutions.
Plan well and plan for next 20 years. That may put the reservation genie back in the bottle. Else, we should start preparing for a reservation for the general categories before this decade runs its course.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Friday, July 9, 2010
Rajiv's self-governance dream is shattered, so let's not talk about it
governancenow.com July 9, 2010
Censorship is back. Only that the style is more subtle this time, not the in-your-face variety that the Emergency of 1975 symbolised.
When the prime minister unveiled the “State of Panchayats Report 2008-09” to mark the National Panchayati Raj Day on April 24 this year, he was probably not aware that the report contained a chapter on “PESA, Left-Wing Extremism and Governance” which contained many unpalatable truths about governance.
More than two months have passed since but the Panchayati Raj ministry has not made that report public yet to hide these truths from you and me. Now it is planning to publish the report minus this chapter!
What does this chapter tell? It tells how successive central and state governments have turned Rajiv Gandhi’s dream of taking self-governance to the grassroots level sour. It tells how the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act of 1996 (PESA), which is meant for the tribal areas that the Maoists have seized, has been violated consistently. How the extensive power and complete command that the tribal communities have been given on their life, their environment and everything that has anything to do with them have been denied to them for more than 14 years.
It says by way its concluding remark: “A decade-and-half on, however, its (PESA’s) promise of self-governance has a long way to go, even as the tribal communities grapple with intensifying challenges and conflicts, against the backdrop of liberalization.”
The report also tells how other constitutional provisions like the Fifth Schedule, meant specifically for the tribal areas, have been completely bypassed. How not one single Governor of nine states having the Scheduled Areas have ever fulfill his or her constitutional responsibility in protecting the tribals’ interest in all the 60 years!
It also says how the Forest Rights Act of 2006 is being violated in denying tribals the rights that have been guaranteed to them—over their land, over their forests, over the hills, over minor forest produces and all other natural resources, including minor minerals.
More importantly, when the country is grappling with the Maoist menace and the policy and law makers are running around like headless chicken in their search for an answer to the basic problem—that is lack of development—this report points out what to do to reverse the situation.
But, as the report exposes the government’s gross violation of its constitutional and other legal obligations, the Panchayati Raj ministry has decided to censor it.
Censorship is back. Only that the style is more subtle this time, not the in-your-face variety that the Emergency of 1975 symbolised.
When the prime minister unveiled the “State of Panchayats Report 2008-09” to mark the National Panchayati Raj Day on April 24 this year, he was probably not aware that the report contained a chapter on “PESA, Left-Wing Extremism and Governance” which contained many unpalatable truths about governance.
More than two months have passed since but the Panchayati Raj ministry has not made that report public yet to hide these truths from you and me. Now it is planning to publish the report minus this chapter!
What does this chapter tell? It tells how successive central and state governments have turned Rajiv Gandhi’s dream of taking self-governance to the grassroots level sour. It tells how the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act of 1996 (PESA), which is meant for the tribal areas that the Maoists have seized, has been violated consistently. How the extensive power and complete command that the tribal communities have been given on their life, their environment and everything that has anything to do with them have been denied to them for more than 14 years.
It says by way its concluding remark: “A decade-and-half on, however, its (PESA’s) promise of self-governance has a long way to go, even as the tribal communities grapple with intensifying challenges and conflicts, against the backdrop of liberalization.”
The report also tells how other constitutional provisions like the Fifth Schedule, meant specifically for the tribal areas, have been completely bypassed. How not one single Governor of nine states having the Scheduled Areas have ever fulfill his or her constitutional responsibility in protecting the tribals’ interest in all the 60 years!
It also says how the Forest Rights Act of 2006 is being violated in denying tribals the rights that have been guaranteed to them—over their land, over their forests, over the hills, over minor forest produces and all other natural resources, including minor minerals.
More importantly, when the country is grappling with the Maoist menace and the policy and law makers are running around like headless chicken in their search for an answer to the basic problem—that is lack of development—this report points out what to do to reverse the situation.
But, as the report exposes the government’s gross violation of its constitutional and other legal obligations, the Panchayati Raj ministry has decided to censor it.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
This time, don’t take that call from the PMO, Mr Ramesh!
July 07 2010, governancenow.com
MoEF's position on certain isssues may ruffle the Union Cabinet's feathers but they show rare principle
It is not at all common or usual for a minister to take a principled stand; or having taken it, to stick his or her neck out to defend that position. In that sense, environment and forests minister Jairam Ramesh’s position on a few contentious issues is admirable.
His refusal to bow to pressure from his cabinet colleagues in the aviation, power and surface transport ministries has sent a strong signal that environmental clearance is neither a matter or routine nor right. That there will be rules and rules will be followed.
In showing that he is no pushover, Ramesh has rubbed many a minister the wrong way. Any place else he would have been feted for his independent stand on issues, but here there are already murmurs of Ramesh losing his portfolio in the soon-expected reshuffle. These ministers want a more pliable colleague in the green ministry and that includes even the prime minister, who ordered that Ramesh take a relook at the classification of "go" and "no-go" areas for mining in such a manner as to dramatically increase the latter area substantially.
Alas, Ramesh caved in yesterday. He has now reduced, in one fell stroke, the "no-go" areas by ten percent. And much as we must appreciate his commitment to the cause, we cannot overlook the fact that by succumbing to this demand from the highest quarter he has shown himself as unreliable. Either Ramesh had then taken a whimsical decision to declare such substantial areas (where projects had already been announced) as "no-go" zones or he has now taken an equally whimsical decision to roll back that area by 10 percent. So what are we to believe, that in a matter of two weeks, 10 per cent of the forests have disappeared into thin air because the Prime Minister said swoosh?!
This is sad not just because he has given in on the "no-go" areas. You can bet your carbon credits that this will not be the last time that the prime minister will call Ramesh. Already Praful Patel is making noises about Ramesh obstructing the Navi Mumbai airport project. Ramesh has steadfastly maintained that serious environmental issues are involved and he would not budge without a proper environment impact assessment (EIA) study—something that is beyond Patel’s comprehension. For his benefit and the benefit of others, Ramesh listed out these concerns: the airport expansion entails destruction of 400 acre of mangroves; diversion of two rivers and blasting of a 80-ft island!
So far Ramesh has also taken a tough stand on not allowing private helipads in Mumbai, which is bound to rub many the wrong ways. Talking to reporters on Tuesday in New Delhi, he spelt out his stand. He said: "Private helipad is a complete no-no. All helipads should be owned by the government and should be used for public service - medical emergency and strategic need."
His stand is based on a recent study by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board which shows noise pollution at the time of take-off and landing of helicopters stands at 100-120 decibel—which is twice the permissible level in residential areas. Mukesh Ambani has been allowed three helipads on his 27-storey residential complex. Ramesh said those too violated noise pollution rules and his ministry would look into it. In both these cases, Ramesh, as you can see, will ruffle a lot of feathers in high places once again. The prime minister might be tempted to call Ramesh once again with friendly advice on how important all this is for 10 percent growth.
This time round, just don't take that call from the PMO, Mr Ramesh!
MoEF's position on certain isssues may ruffle the Union Cabinet's feathers but they show rare principle
It is not at all common or usual for a minister to take a principled stand; or having taken it, to stick his or her neck out to defend that position. In that sense, environment and forests minister Jairam Ramesh’s position on a few contentious issues is admirable.
His refusal to bow to pressure from his cabinet colleagues in the aviation, power and surface transport ministries has sent a strong signal that environmental clearance is neither a matter or routine nor right. That there will be rules and rules will be followed.
In showing that he is no pushover, Ramesh has rubbed many a minister the wrong way. Any place else he would have been feted for his independent stand on issues, but here there are already murmurs of Ramesh losing his portfolio in the soon-expected reshuffle. These ministers want a more pliable colleague in the green ministry and that includes even the prime minister, who ordered that Ramesh take a relook at the classification of "go" and "no-go" areas for mining in such a manner as to dramatically increase the latter area substantially.
Alas, Ramesh caved in yesterday. He has now reduced, in one fell stroke, the "no-go" areas by ten percent. And much as we must appreciate his commitment to the cause, we cannot overlook the fact that by succumbing to this demand from the highest quarter he has shown himself as unreliable. Either Ramesh had then taken a whimsical decision to declare such substantial areas (where projects had already been announced) as "no-go" zones or he has now taken an equally whimsical decision to roll back that area by 10 percent. So what are we to believe, that in a matter of two weeks, 10 per cent of the forests have disappeared into thin air because the Prime Minister said swoosh?!
This is sad not just because he has given in on the "no-go" areas. You can bet your carbon credits that this will not be the last time that the prime minister will call Ramesh. Already Praful Patel is making noises about Ramesh obstructing the Navi Mumbai airport project. Ramesh has steadfastly maintained that serious environmental issues are involved and he would not budge without a proper environment impact assessment (EIA) study—something that is beyond Patel’s comprehension. For his benefit and the benefit of others, Ramesh listed out these concerns: the airport expansion entails destruction of 400 acre of mangroves; diversion of two rivers and blasting of a 80-ft island!
So far Ramesh has also taken a tough stand on not allowing private helipads in Mumbai, which is bound to rub many the wrong ways. Talking to reporters on Tuesday in New Delhi, he spelt out his stand. He said: "Private helipad is a complete no-no. All helipads should be owned by the government and should be used for public service - medical emergency and strategic need."
His stand is based on a recent study by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board which shows noise pollution at the time of take-off and landing of helicopters stands at 100-120 decibel—which is twice the permissible level in residential areas. Mukesh Ambani has been allowed three helipads on his 27-storey residential complex. Ramesh said those too violated noise pollution rules and his ministry would look into it. In both these cases, Ramesh, as you can see, will ruffle a lot of feathers in high places once again. The prime minister might be tempted to call Ramesh once again with friendly advice on how important all this is for 10 percent growth.
This time round, just don't take that call from the PMO, Mr Ramesh!
Friday, July 2, 2010
How cheap are you selling us, Prime Minister?
Governance Now, July 1-15
There is an old Oriya proverb which says “who can wake up a man who is only pretending to be asleep?” That is the case with the powers-that-be when it comes to dealing with the multinationals—be it Enron, Union Carbide or the other giants currently being wooed to set up nuclear power plants. Less than 24 hours after the Bhopal verdict numbed the nation, the government, on June 8, had quietly wanted to exempt the suppliers from the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill 2010 in the event of a nuclear disaster.
Had that gone unnoticed, it would have almost completely wiped out the polluter-pays principle—an internationally accepted policy upheld by the Supreme Court in its 2005 judgment (Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action vs UOI & Ors).
It is a myth that the bill provides for a three-tier compensation system. The bill fixes the operator’s liability at a mere Rs 500 crore, the first-tier. Any compensation beyond that will be borne by the “central government”, which constitutes the second tier. Now, this amount can go up to a maximum of 300 million Special Drawing Rights (or Rs 2,000 crore at current valuation of SDR).
In the third tier, the money will come from an international fund to be set up under the Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC) of 1997. The CSC is yet to come into force because certain requirements are yet to be met—five countries with nuclear capacity of 400 GWTh must ratify it. It is highly unlikely that CSC will become operational after India becomes the fifth one to sign it. So, the third-tier doesn’t even exist!
There we are, left with just Rs 500 crore in case a nuclear disaster strikes. Those defending the bill say any amount higher than this would make the business unviable for the operator. Here is a simple reply: If Union Carbide could insure its pesticide plant in Bhopal for $ 350 million in mid-70s, surely a nuclear plant can be insured for the same amount (that Rs 1,650 crore) in 2010?
And how did the government fix “maximum” compensation at 300 million SDR? It is not clear but it seems the idea was taken from the CSC, which, interestingly, fixes the “minimum” liability at 300 million SDR.
Now, consider this: The liability limit in the US is $ 11.6 billion; in Spain $ 1 billion; in the Netherlands $ 495 million and in Japan and Germany “unlimited”. When governments throw high-sounding phrases at you, you know they are preparing to sell you cheap. But this cheap, Mr Prime Minister?
There is an old Oriya proverb which says “who can wake up a man who is only pretending to be asleep?” That is the case with the powers-that-be when it comes to dealing with the multinationals—be it Enron, Union Carbide or the other giants currently being wooed to set up nuclear power plants. Less than 24 hours after the Bhopal verdict numbed the nation, the government, on June 8, had quietly wanted to exempt the suppliers from the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill 2010 in the event of a nuclear disaster.
Had that gone unnoticed, it would have almost completely wiped out the polluter-pays principle—an internationally accepted policy upheld by the Supreme Court in its 2005 judgment (Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action vs UOI & Ors).
It is a myth that the bill provides for a three-tier compensation system. The bill fixes the operator’s liability at a mere Rs 500 crore, the first-tier. Any compensation beyond that will be borne by the “central government”, which constitutes the second tier. Now, this amount can go up to a maximum of 300 million Special Drawing Rights (or Rs 2,000 crore at current valuation of SDR).
In the third tier, the money will come from an international fund to be set up under the Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC) of 1997. The CSC is yet to come into force because certain requirements are yet to be met—five countries with nuclear capacity of 400 GWTh must ratify it. It is highly unlikely that CSC will become operational after India becomes the fifth one to sign it. So, the third-tier doesn’t even exist!
There we are, left with just Rs 500 crore in case a nuclear disaster strikes. Those defending the bill say any amount higher than this would make the business unviable for the operator. Here is a simple reply: If Union Carbide could insure its pesticide plant in Bhopal for $ 350 million in mid-70s, surely a nuclear plant can be insured for the same amount (that Rs 1,650 crore) in 2010?
And how did the government fix “maximum” compensation at 300 million SDR? It is not clear but it seems the idea was taken from the CSC, which, interestingly, fixes the “minimum” liability at 300 million SDR.
Now, consider this: The liability limit in the US is $ 11.6 billion; in Spain $ 1 billion; in the Netherlands $ 495 million and in Japan and Germany “unlimited”. When governments throw high-sounding phrases at you, you know they are preparing to sell you cheap. But this cheap, Mr Prime Minister?
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Don't bet on Met for accurate monsoon forecasts
July 1, 2010, governancenow.com
Deficient rainfall delays sowing in north India
The Indian Meteorological Department may let the farmers down once again. As against its prediction of a normal rainfall this year (102 percent to be precise), June has witnessed scanty rainfall in the grain bowl of India—Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and parts of Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.
According to the met department’s own record, these states have not only received scanty rainfall, the rain bearing clouds have disappeared altogether. Unless these clouds reappear in the next few days it would jeopardize sowing of paddy and sugar crop. What happens next is anybody’s guess.
Particularly disturbing is the low rainfall in the week between June 17 and 24--21 percent. This takes the average shortfall for June to 13 percent, which is not much in absolute terms but is crucial because it adversely affects sowing of crops and there are tell-tale signs that the monsoon is slowing down. The met department hopes that the clouds would reappear from July 5 onwards. But anyone who has been following the met office knows that its prediction can never be relied on.
Take the case of last year. The met department predicted a “near normal” rainfall at 94 percent. That was revised to 91 percent when the rain clouds played hide and seek. The downward revision continued but couldn’t match the actual deficiency and the year ended as one of the worst drought-hit in recent years.
Given the fact that our agriculture is largely dependent on monsoon, it is crucial that our met department provides accurate and timely information—a task it has singularly failed to perform for decades. Worse, the predictions are never specific in terms of the days or the weeks of a rainy month and a block or taluk of a district where farmers wait for the signal from the sky to begin their farming activities.
As a minister in charge of the met department during the previous UPA regime, Kapil Sibal had tried to completely revamp the weather prediction system. More than five years down the line, little progress has been made.
All that the met department has got so far is a “super computer” that can deal with additional data required to predict rainfall. This was installed only this January, but the Doppler Weather Radars, which are to provide a crucial chunk of weather-related data, are yet to be in place. Less than half-a-dozen radars have been installed so far--of 55 that are required. According to the officials, additional six radars would be installed by end of this year. The plan is to complete the task by the end of 2012, which seems a bit far-fetched now.
Sibal had also tried to appoint scientists from abroad to give a fillip to the way the weather-related data are collated and analyzed to predict rains but this was not allowed because of protests from the bureaucratic set up. Assuming that all the technologies are to be in place in the next years, it is difficult to imagine our homegrown scientists used to antiquated methods—largely dependent on weather balloons that are released twice a day at 36 places in the country to collect weather updates and some information that are collected through weather satellites--would actually be able to put the superior technology to good use.
There are other issues too, like the mathematical model used for the purpose of predicting rain. This model keeps changing from year to year and not a single one has come close to making accurate predictions.
So, the farmers are condemned to pray the weather gods. And so is the government, which is heavily banking on a good monsoon, and consequently a good harvest, to bail it out of the crisis caused by food inflation.
Deficient rainfall delays sowing in north India
The Indian Meteorological Department may let the farmers down once again. As against its prediction of a normal rainfall this year (102 percent to be precise), June has witnessed scanty rainfall in the grain bowl of India—Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and parts of Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.
According to the met department’s own record, these states have not only received scanty rainfall, the rain bearing clouds have disappeared altogether. Unless these clouds reappear in the next few days it would jeopardize sowing of paddy and sugar crop. What happens next is anybody’s guess.
Particularly disturbing is the low rainfall in the week between June 17 and 24--21 percent. This takes the average shortfall for June to 13 percent, which is not much in absolute terms but is crucial because it adversely affects sowing of crops and there are tell-tale signs that the monsoon is slowing down. The met department hopes that the clouds would reappear from July 5 onwards. But anyone who has been following the met office knows that its prediction can never be relied on.
Take the case of last year. The met department predicted a “near normal” rainfall at 94 percent. That was revised to 91 percent when the rain clouds played hide and seek. The downward revision continued but couldn’t match the actual deficiency and the year ended as one of the worst drought-hit in recent years.
Given the fact that our agriculture is largely dependent on monsoon, it is crucial that our met department provides accurate and timely information—a task it has singularly failed to perform for decades. Worse, the predictions are never specific in terms of the days or the weeks of a rainy month and a block or taluk of a district where farmers wait for the signal from the sky to begin their farming activities.
As a minister in charge of the met department during the previous UPA regime, Kapil Sibal had tried to completely revamp the weather prediction system. More than five years down the line, little progress has been made.
All that the met department has got so far is a “super computer” that can deal with additional data required to predict rainfall. This was installed only this January, but the Doppler Weather Radars, which are to provide a crucial chunk of weather-related data, are yet to be in place. Less than half-a-dozen radars have been installed so far--of 55 that are required. According to the officials, additional six radars would be installed by end of this year. The plan is to complete the task by the end of 2012, which seems a bit far-fetched now.
Sibal had also tried to appoint scientists from abroad to give a fillip to the way the weather-related data are collated and analyzed to predict rains but this was not allowed because of protests from the bureaucratic set up. Assuming that all the technologies are to be in place in the next years, it is difficult to imagine our homegrown scientists used to antiquated methods—largely dependent on weather balloons that are released twice a day at 36 places in the country to collect weather updates and some information that are collected through weather satellites--would actually be able to put the superior technology to good use.
There are other issues too, like the mathematical model used for the purpose of predicting rain. This model keeps changing from year to year and not a single one has come close to making accurate predictions.
So, the farmers are condemned to pray the weather gods. And so is the government, which is heavily banking on a good monsoon, and consequently a good harvest, to bail it out of the crisis caused by food inflation.
Well done, Manmohan, Mugambo khush hua. Very khush!
June 28,2010, governancenow.com
Congress Party's aam admi might be complaining about the fuel price hikes, but G20 likes it
"We welcome the work of finance and energy ministers in delivering implementation strategies and time-frames, based on national circumstances, for the rationalisation and phase out over the medium term of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption..." said the G20 declaration on Sunday after its latest meeting in Canada.
Shorn of all the bureaucratese, it just meant, at least in the context of India: "Thank you Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for raising the prices of petrol, diesel, kerosene and LPG."
Compliments to Manmohan Singh were, of course, in order, because in the G20 meeting at Pittsburg (USA) last Septmember, member countries including India had committed to phasing out fuel subsidies. Manmohan Singh had delivered on a promise to the global leadership just before taking that flight for this year's conference. That kind of commitment was, obviously, going to be much appreciated.
While praise for our Prime Minister should make us feel proud, there is, of course, a very valid reason why our chests are not pumped up. The steep hike in fuel prices comes at a time when food inflation continues to be close to 17 per cent, and has been there for a long time. The aam admi is naturally worried that this hike in fuel prices will fuel a hike in prices across the board.
This lack of enthusiasm in the common man should be extremely irritating for the good doctor, hailed world over as a great economist--he even told the G20 countries how to manage their economies and everybody listened--never mind that he doesn't quite seem to know how to control prices in India! There are two simple reasons for the distrust back home. The explanation given to the people here was that the prices needed to be hiked because the "huge under-recoveries" were imperiling the oil companies.
Now look at the figures. Indian Oil Corporation registered a meagre net profit of Rs 10,000 crore in the just ended financial year and ONGC did even worse with a net profit of Rs 16, 767 crore!
The second reason we can't trust the prime minister's assertions is that this is not the first time he has been eager to please the West. The Nuclear Civil Liabilities Bill was chewed upon and spat out by the Opposition in March 2010 when it was introduced. It seemed like the Opposition would rally and prevent the bill from being introduced. So it was hastily withdrawn with the promise to make amends to address the Opposition's concerns.
That was in March. In May, on the last of the budget session, Manmohan's government sprang a surprise by introducing the Bill again. Without changing a comma. By now the government had cut all sorts of deals with Mulayam Singh, Lalu Prasad and Mayawati by flashing a few CBI cases in their faces. Why would a Prime Minister known for his integrity cut such deals? Because the first ever Indo-US strategic dialogue was scheduled within a week (early June), and India was eager to show "movement" on the Nuke Bill because the US is ever so keen to help India in its hour of energy crisis.
You might say these are just coincidences. But why do these coincidences happen to be against our interests? Is it because, nesting within Reformist Manmohan is a serial pleaser of the West?
Congress Party's aam admi might be complaining about the fuel price hikes, but G20 likes it
"We welcome the work of finance and energy ministers in delivering implementation strategies and time-frames, based on national circumstances, for the rationalisation and phase out over the medium term of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption..." said the G20 declaration on Sunday after its latest meeting in Canada.
Shorn of all the bureaucratese, it just meant, at least in the context of India: "Thank you Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for raising the prices of petrol, diesel, kerosene and LPG."
Compliments to Manmohan Singh were, of course, in order, because in the G20 meeting at Pittsburg (USA) last Septmember, member countries including India had committed to phasing out fuel subsidies. Manmohan Singh had delivered on a promise to the global leadership just before taking that flight for this year's conference. That kind of commitment was, obviously, going to be much appreciated.
While praise for our Prime Minister should make us feel proud, there is, of course, a very valid reason why our chests are not pumped up. The steep hike in fuel prices comes at a time when food inflation continues to be close to 17 per cent, and has been there for a long time. The aam admi is naturally worried that this hike in fuel prices will fuel a hike in prices across the board.
This lack of enthusiasm in the common man should be extremely irritating for the good doctor, hailed world over as a great economist--he even told the G20 countries how to manage their economies and everybody listened--never mind that he doesn't quite seem to know how to control prices in India! There are two simple reasons for the distrust back home. The explanation given to the people here was that the prices needed to be hiked because the "huge under-recoveries" were imperiling the oil companies.
Now look at the figures. Indian Oil Corporation registered a meagre net profit of Rs 10,000 crore in the just ended financial year and ONGC did even worse with a net profit of Rs 16, 767 crore!
The second reason we can't trust the prime minister's assertions is that this is not the first time he has been eager to please the West. The Nuclear Civil Liabilities Bill was chewed upon and spat out by the Opposition in March 2010 when it was introduced. It seemed like the Opposition would rally and prevent the bill from being introduced. So it was hastily withdrawn with the promise to make amends to address the Opposition's concerns.
That was in March. In May, on the last of the budget session, Manmohan's government sprang a surprise by introducing the Bill again. Without changing a comma. By now the government had cut all sorts of deals with Mulayam Singh, Lalu Prasad and Mayawati by flashing a few CBI cases in their faces. Why would a Prime Minister known for his integrity cut such deals? Because the first ever Indo-US strategic dialogue was scheduled within a week (early June), and India was eager to show "movement" on the Nuke Bill because the US is ever so keen to help India in its hour of energy crisis.
You might say these are just coincidences. But why do these coincidences happen to be against our interests? Is it because, nesting within Reformist Manmohan is a serial pleaser of the West?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)