How the maladies like ‘Opportunism’, ‘Sycophancy’, ‘Personality-cult’, and ‘Appeasement-approach’ got deeply entrenched in our system after independence
During the colonial rule it was an administrative compulsion to encourage the gullibles to chaperone around the ‘Raj’ functionaries thereby enabling the latter to control the large local population spread over vast area of the Indian sub-continent. Apart from the ‘employees’ segment (bound by service conduct rules), people from business/industry were also roped in as loyalists and the ‘most faithful’ ones amongst them (the Opportunists) were conferred title such as ‘OBE’ and ‘Rai Bahadur’ to entice their unwavering faithfulness. The Queen/King of Britain was projected as the ‘Idol-like’ person to give boost to the ‘Personality-cult’ culture. The inhabitants of remote and hilly areas were granted very liberal rights & concessions over the local resources to keep them happy enabling the ‘Raj’ to remotely control the administration. Thus, in a way, ‘Opportunism’, ‘Sycophancy’, Personality-cult’ and ‘Appeasement-approach’ formed an institutionalized mechanism which was necessitated and justified from the perspective of the ‘Colonial/Foreign Ruler’. People of India reasonably expected that all these four maladies would be deeply buried by the ‘Indian Rulers’ who succeeded the ‘Colonial Rulers’ after the attainment of independence. Alas! this did not happen and to the contrary, these maladies were blatantly promoted by Nehru and his Congress Party successors, which destroyed the very foundations of the basic institutions on which a ‘Healthy & Efficient Democratic System’ and the ‘Allied Institutions’ could have evolved in independent India.
The first cabinet of independent India comprised representatives from non-congress parties as well and thus Dr.Shyama Prashad Mukerjee also became a Cabinet Minister and was entrusted with the department of industry. It is well known that Nehru was highly averse to criticism & dissensions and deeply nursed hatred against the dissenters & the detractors. Dr. Mukerjee’s dissensions on fundamental issues concerning national security & development coupled with his giant personality did not go well with Nehru-cult forcing the former to quit the cabinet. Even within the Congress party, the ‘Yes-men’, ‘Sycophants’, and ‘Opportunists’ were preferred to those who exhibited some sort of ‘independent thinking’, ‘straightforwardness’, and ‘non-toeing-attitude’. Owing to lower level of literacy, manipulability of the election system, ‘aggressive propaganda approach’ of the Congress party and dominance of the ‘western-influenced’ media, Nehru not only could manage to win successive elections but even managed to acquire a sort of charismatic image (or may be it was so made to be perceived by the pseudo-intellectuals). The combined effect of all this was that despite repeated counter-points made on all issues (Inflation/Price-rise, Poverty, Unemployment, Kashmir, Defense of the country (against Pakistan and China), Tamil issue in Srilanka, Internal security against terrorism and Foreign policy etc.) by the Bhartiya Jan Sangh consistently went completely unheeded and the country suffered terrible loss in terms of losing vast chunk of its territories to China & Pakistan and also getting deeply humiliated several times at the international fora. Those of the Congress men who could not toe Nehru line left the party and formed parties such as ‘Socialist party’, and ‘Praja Socialist party’. However, the deep rooting of the four maladies went unabated in the Congress party and being the sole ruling party in the country (centre & states), it greatly influenced the polity at large. The bureaucratic class, bound by the service & conducts rules, fell easy prey to the Nehruvian ethos and went whole hog in getting imbibed in the four maladies thus becoming the role models for the rest in the country.
May be Lal Bahadur Shastri could have changed the course but unfortunately his tenure of 18 months was too short and moreover the ‘food crisis’ and the ‘Indo-Pak war’ had to be given all the energy & attention during this period. Indira Gandhi took the reigns of the country in 1966 and found to her dismay that she would not be able to command unquestionable authority like her father did. 1967 elections also came as a setback to her when Congress base in the Centre and in many States shrunk substantially. The 1969 split in the Congress party was engineered by Indira Gandhi (defeating the official candidate of the party in country’s Presidential elections) with the twin objective of regaining control within her own party and to create some sort of populist façade (Nationalisation of Banks) to divert the attention of Indian masses suffering terribly under inflation/price-rise/poverty/unemployment. Despite managing to win large majority in the ensuing mid-term Lok Sabha polls (manipulability in polls was proved beyond doubt when Allahabad High Court struck down Indira Gandhi’s election on the grounds of serious poll malpractices), mass agitations started all around in the country when the problems got further aggravated and the illusion created by the façade got dismantled. Then started Indira Gandhi’s tirade against democracy in the country and she not only vehemently promoted the four maladies (Opportunism, Sycophancy, Personality-cult and Appeasement-approach) but started destroying the ‘institutions of democracy’ in a systematic & planned way. The ‘Executive’ became spineless after witnessing the horrors of ‘Emergency’; the ‘Judiciary’ became manipulable on account of ‘supersession-approach’ in the appointment of judges; “Legislature’ got crippled on account of imprisonment of the ‘dissenting leaders’, and; Constitutional Law of India was amended in such a way that the basic & fundamental structure almost got obliterated.
Fortunately, there came an interregnum in 1977 when Janata Party (comprising Bhartiya Jan Sangh, the Socialists and the ‘Break-away groups from Congress party) replaced Congress party at the centre after a humiliating, though befitting, defeat of the latter in the elections, held after extending the life of the then preceding Lok Sabha. Bound by the principles of Jan Sangh (the only partner-party in the conglomerate called ‘Janata Party’ which had a clear-cut philosophy and distinct principles- Respect for Democratic norms, Firmness in maintaining high standards of Discipline, Promoting merit/performance rather than personality-cult, Discarding Opportunism/Sycophancy and not following the Appeasement-approach), the Janata Party led by Morarji Desai as Prime Minister, did adhere to the approach which would have stemmed the growth of these four maladies to a great extent, had the Government not got throttled by the ‘self-seekers’ mid-way.
In 1980, Indira Gandhi came back to power, thanks to the disillusionment of the voters caused by the colossal selfishness & immaturity of certain leaders in the Janata Party, and she re-picked up the agenda of strengthening all the four maladies (opportunism, sycophancy, personality-cult and appeasement-approach) even more vigorously, obviously feeling increasingly emboldened to tread this path. Rajiv Gandhi more or less followed the footsteps of his mother in this regard. V.P.Singh got stuck in Mandal Commission report and neither had the perspective nor the time to pay attention to such laudable tasks.
Since Narsimha Rao headed almost a minority government, he could not have contributed much to either nation building or to even institution building. However, the much talked liberlisation is attributable more to the force of the contemporary circumstances rather than to the ingenuousness of Rao or for that matter even of Manmohan Singh (whose dullest performance currently as Prime Minister in the field of ‘Reforms’ speaks volumes about his ‘capability’ and ‘willpower’). Deve Gauda’s tenure followed by the Gujral tenure hardly need mention because both had shorter periods and remained too busy in managing the coalition partners to pay any worthwhile attention to any institution building tasks.
The second ‘interregnum’ deserving mention is the Vajpayee-led NDA regime. A sincere & honest effort was made during this period in repairing the damage caused to various institutions. Sincere efforts were also made to desiccate the four stated ‘maladies’ but the fifty year old root system would not let it happen so easily.
The main feature of the current UPA regime is the full blooming of all these four ‘maladies’. Earlier, the two ‘maladies, namely, ‘sycophancy’ and ‘personality-cult’ were the exclusive preserves of Congress party and the other partners in UPA suffered quite mildly from these. But now the parties other than Congress are far ahead of the leading partner (in the UPA) in practicing these openly. ‘Opportunism’ and ‘Appeasement-approach’ have always been the hallmark of policy & principle of all partners in the UPA.
Will all political parties in our country ever draw a national consensus to eradicate the four maladies- ‘opportunism’, ‘sycophancy’, ‘personality-cult’ and ‘appeasement-approach’- to enable emergence of an environment wherein the democracy & the allied institutions thrive in a sustainable manner.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
AI-IA Privatisation
AI-IA Disinvestment- An imminent necessity
Air India was in the first list of companies referred to the Disinvestment Commission in 1996. The Commission, after a thorough examination, made the following recommendations:
Ø Government to provide Rs.1000 crores as equity for financial restructuring of Air India, which would raise its paid up capital to Rs.1154 crores;
Ø Simultaneously, Government to initiate process of induction of a strategic partner (having the requisite financial, technical, marketing and managerial capabilities and commitment for AI’s fleet expansion) on the basis of global competitive bids through issue of fresh equity shares of the total face value of Rs.770 crores, which would enhance the paid up equity capital to Rs.1924 crores and will reduce government holding to 60%;
Ø Strategic partner should be a consortium of Airlines and investors, with at least 25% of equity held by Indian investors, and the Shareholders Agreement to provide for appropriate share in the management to the strategic partner;
Ø Thereafter, Government to disinvest 20% of total paid up capital by offering 10% to domestic institutional investors at the price paid by the highest bidder and the remaining 10% to the retail investors and the employees at a discount (shares not taken by retail investors/employees to be offered to domestic investors), which would bring down the government holding to 40%.
The Government broadly accepted the recommendations of the Disinvestment Commission except the one pertaining to infusion of Rs.!000 crores and decided as under:
Ø Government equity to be brought down to 40% through disinvestment process;
Ø 40% of the equity to be disinvested in favour of a strategic partner;
Ø Up to 10% of the equity to be offered to employees;
Ø The balance 10% of equity to be sold to financial institutions and/or on the share market;
Ø Foreign holding to be limited to a maximum of 26% of total equity if the strategic partner is a joint venture with foreign holding;
Ø Global Advisor to assist in disinvestment process.
On the other hand Indian Airlines was not examined by the Disinvestment Commission and instead the case was considered by the Government in the light of Kelkar Committee (set up to examine the financial restructuring of Indian Airlines) Report. The main recommendations made in this report were:
Ø Infusion of Rs.922 crores by way of government equity/ upfront contribution/ subordinated loan/ ATF subsidy/ IA contribution/ ESOP;
Ø Infusion of Rs.758.35 crores by way of public issue.
The recommendations of Kelkar Committee were examined in the Government at various levels and finally the following decisions were taken:
Ø Government equity to be brought down to 49%;
Ø 26% equity to be sold to a strategic partner;
Ø Balance 25% equity to be sold to financial institutions, employees and other investors;
Ø Foreign holding not to exceed 40% equity of the bidders, except for NRIs/NRI-controlled Overseas Corporate Bodies, if the strategic partner is a joint venture with foreign holding.
The process of disinvestment was undertaken as per the prescribed procedure. In case of Air India, 9 offers were received from the prospective bidders but only 6 of these could meet the pre-qualification criteria of minimum net worth. 4 parties did not submit the Initial Technical Proposal and finally only one party (Tata-Singapore Airlines Consortium) was left in the fray. The entire process had almost been completed and 75 steps (out of a total of 80 (major & minor) steps) were already over when suddenly, the bidder intimated their intention to withdraw. The prime reason, though, was some sort of discord between the Consortium partners, but one factor which might have acted as a scaring factor was the media reports regarding minimum expected price of 25000-28000 crores (quoting quite a few political Hi-Fis about this unimaginable estimates). With 23 aircrafts of average life 15 years and per aircraft manpower of 700-800 (vis-à-vis 200-300 global standard), such an estimation was not justified. However, the skills & reputation of the cockpit crew and the technical personnel being one of the superb selling point, the entrepreneurship & financial strength of Tatas coupled with the aviation management skills of Singapore Airlines would have provided the much needed support to Air India and there was a fair chance of Air India-Singapore Airlines getting to the top of the ladder globally. Alas! this was not to be then but may be the time is quite ripe now to make a second attempt.
In case of Indian Airlines, 6 offers were received from the prospective bidders, out of which only 4 met the pre-qualification criteria of minimum net worth. 2 parties did not submit the Initial Technical Proposal and finally no party was left in the field.
After the merger of Air India and Indian Airlines, the combined entity becomes a very attractive one for any prospective partner. As it is, the aviation sector is fraught with numerous risks & adversities, having low margins in operation and cut throat competition, which necessitates mergers & acquisitions. There have been several mergers & acquisitions of major International/National Airlines overseas which need be taken note of, seriously, before it is too late. The loss of 2144 crore during 2007-08 and likelihood of incurring double the amount during the current year should sound quite frightening, both to the company as well as the Government. The most appropriate remedy lies in going in for immediate disinvestment of AI-IA entity and roping in of a good strategic partner to not only bailing it out of recurring financial trouble but more importantly, making it the top Airline globally (with due guarantee to sustain this position in perpetuity).
Air India was in the first list of companies referred to the Disinvestment Commission in 1996. The Commission, after a thorough examination, made the following recommendations:
Ø Government to provide Rs.1000 crores as equity for financial restructuring of Air India, which would raise its paid up capital to Rs.1154 crores;
Ø Simultaneously, Government to initiate process of induction of a strategic partner (having the requisite financial, technical, marketing and managerial capabilities and commitment for AI’s fleet expansion) on the basis of global competitive bids through issue of fresh equity shares of the total face value of Rs.770 crores, which would enhance the paid up equity capital to Rs.1924 crores and will reduce government holding to 60%;
Ø Strategic partner should be a consortium of Airlines and investors, with at least 25% of equity held by Indian investors, and the Shareholders Agreement to provide for appropriate share in the management to the strategic partner;
Ø Thereafter, Government to disinvest 20% of total paid up capital by offering 10% to domestic institutional investors at the price paid by the highest bidder and the remaining 10% to the retail investors and the employees at a discount (shares not taken by retail investors/employees to be offered to domestic investors), which would bring down the government holding to 40%.
The Government broadly accepted the recommendations of the Disinvestment Commission except the one pertaining to infusion of Rs.!000 crores and decided as under:
Ø Government equity to be brought down to 40% through disinvestment process;
Ø 40% of the equity to be disinvested in favour of a strategic partner;
Ø Up to 10% of the equity to be offered to employees;
Ø The balance 10% of equity to be sold to financial institutions and/or on the share market;
Ø Foreign holding to be limited to a maximum of 26% of total equity if the strategic partner is a joint venture with foreign holding;
Ø Global Advisor to assist in disinvestment process.
On the other hand Indian Airlines was not examined by the Disinvestment Commission and instead the case was considered by the Government in the light of Kelkar Committee (set up to examine the financial restructuring of Indian Airlines) Report. The main recommendations made in this report were:
Ø Infusion of Rs.922 crores by way of government equity/ upfront contribution/ subordinated loan/ ATF subsidy/ IA contribution/ ESOP;
Ø Infusion of Rs.758.35 crores by way of public issue.
The recommendations of Kelkar Committee were examined in the Government at various levels and finally the following decisions were taken:
Ø Government equity to be brought down to 49%;
Ø 26% equity to be sold to a strategic partner;
Ø Balance 25% equity to be sold to financial institutions, employees and other investors;
Ø Foreign holding not to exceed 40% equity of the bidders, except for NRIs/NRI-controlled Overseas Corporate Bodies, if the strategic partner is a joint venture with foreign holding.
The process of disinvestment was undertaken as per the prescribed procedure. In case of Air India, 9 offers were received from the prospective bidders but only 6 of these could meet the pre-qualification criteria of minimum net worth. 4 parties did not submit the Initial Technical Proposal and finally only one party (Tata-Singapore Airlines Consortium) was left in the fray. The entire process had almost been completed and 75 steps (out of a total of 80 (major & minor) steps) were already over when suddenly, the bidder intimated their intention to withdraw. The prime reason, though, was some sort of discord between the Consortium partners, but one factor which might have acted as a scaring factor was the media reports regarding minimum expected price of 25000-28000 crores (quoting quite a few political Hi-Fis about this unimaginable estimates). With 23 aircrafts of average life 15 years and per aircraft manpower of 700-800 (vis-à-vis 200-300 global standard), such an estimation was not justified. However, the skills & reputation of the cockpit crew and the technical personnel being one of the superb selling point, the entrepreneurship & financial strength of Tatas coupled with the aviation management skills of Singapore Airlines would have provided the much needed support to Air India and there was a fair chance of Air India-Singapore Airlines getting to the top of the ladder globally. Alas! this was not to be then but may be the time is quite ripe now to make a second attempt.
In case of Indian Airlines, 6 offers were received from the prospective bidders, out of which only 4 met the pre-qualification criteria of minimum net worth. 2 parties did not submit the Initial Technical Proposal and finally no party was left in the field.
After the merger of Air India and Indian Airlines, the combined entity becomes a very attractive one for any prospective partner. As it is, the aviation sector is fraught with numerous risks & adversities, having low margins in operation and cut throat competition, which necessitates mergers & acquisitions. There have been several mergers & acquisitions of major International/National Airlines overseas which need be taken note of, seriously, before it is too late. The loss of 2144 crore during 2007-08 and likelihood of incurring double the amount during the current year should sound quite frightening, both to the company as well as the Government. The most appropriate remedy lies in going in for immediate disinvestment of AI-IA entity and roping in of a good strategic partner to not only bailing it out of recurring financial trouble but more importantly, making it the top Airline globally (with due guarantee to sustain this position in perpetuity).
Reforms
Public Sector Reforms- A Landmark achievement of Vajpayee Government
The context prevailing at the time India attained independence, necessitated State involvement in various commercial activities. Post war economic depression had dampened the spirit of the private entrepreneurs and the task of reconstruction could be best undertaken by greater involvement of the State. Therefore, the Industrial Policy Resolution of 1948 adopted by Government of India stated as under:
Ø Complete State monopolies in the following sectors:
· Manufacture of arms & ammunition;
· Production & control of atomic energy;
· Ownership & management of Railways;
Ø 6 Basic Industries- Steel, Coal, Aircraft & Ship, Telegraph/ Wireless apparatus- to be developed in Public Sector;
Ø Other areas to be left to Private Sector under State Controlled & Regulated Economy.
5 Public sector companies with equity contribution of R.29 crores from Government of India came into being by 1951. The 1956 Industrial Policy Resolution of Government of India had the following main features:
Ø Concept of Mixed Economy
Ø Industries categorised into three groups:
· Exclusive State preserves: In addition to the 6 sectors mentioned in 1948 Resolution, 3 more added, namely, Zink, Copper and Lead;
· Concurrent/Joint/Mixed-Alluminium, Fertilizers, Other Minerals, Machine tools, Chemical industries, Road & Sea Transport;
· Private sector under regulatory mechanism of the State.
Despite the concept of mixed economy, the growth in the number of public sector companies continued unabated (Figures in bracket indicates financial involvement of the Central Government)- 21 in 1956 (Rs.81 crores), 47 in 1961 (Rs.948 crores), 73 in 1966 (Rs.2400), 84 in 1969 (Rs.3900 crores), 122 in 1974 (Rs.6200 crores), 169 in 1979 (Rs.15000 crores), 215 in 1985 (Rs.42000 crores), 244 in 1990 (Rs.99000 crores), 246 in 1992 (Rs.1,35000 crores) and 240 as on 31st March, 2000 (Rs.2,52,500 crores). Owing to the leftist’s pressure, the phenomenal growth of public sector companies, both in terms of number and financial involvement, occurred during the regime of Indira Gandhi,. Apart from nationalization of Banks, there was a spate of creation of all kinds of companies in state sector many of which later proved great liability to the exchequer.
The serious financial crisis of 1990-91 forced the government to adopt the 1991 Liberlisation Policy having following features:
Ø Deregulation/End of License Raj;
Ø Focus public sector on strategic, hi-tech and essential infrastructure;
Ø Selective opening of ‘Exclusive State Preserves’ to private sector;
Ø List of industries reserved for public sector reduced from 17 to 8 (further reduced in 1993 to 6);
Ø De-reservation of mining activity- coal extraction permitted for captive use by user industries;
Ø Private sector investment permitted in oil exploration & refining, roads, telecom and power generation;
Ø Divesting 20% equity in selected Public Sector Enterprises;
Ø Involvement of Financial Institutions/Mutual Fund Institutions offering shares to employees at a discount.
The selective disinvestment of minority shares was undertaken from 1991 onwards as follows: In 1991-92, minority shares of 47 companies were sold by auction method in bundles of “very good”, “good” and “average” categories; In 1992-93, shares of 35 companies were sold separately (without bundling) by auction method; In 1993-94, equity of 7 companies sold by open auction; In 1994-95, shares of 13 companies were sold by open auction; In 1995-96, equity of 4 companies auctioned while piggy backed IDBI for the 5th company; During 1996-99, GDR issue for 9 companies done in international market. More than Rs.19,000 crores were realized in this entire sale process.
Consequent upon the acceptance of recommendations of the Disinvestment Commission, the strategic sale of 74% equity in Modern Foods Ltd. was completed in 1999-2000, followed by Lagan Jute (60%), BALCO (51%), CMC (51%), CMC(IPO-26.25%), HTL (74%), VSNL(25% out of 52.97% equity held by Govt.), IBP(33.58% out of 59.58% held by Govt.), IBP(IPO-26%), PPL(74%), HZL(26% out of 75.92% held by Govt.), JESSOP(72%), IPCL(26% out of 59.95% held by Govt.), IPCL(IPO-28.95%), 19 Hotels of ITDC(all loss making), 3 Hotels(2 loss making) of HCI (Air India subsidiary), Maruti(4.2% out of 49.74%) and IPOs of Maruti(27,5%), DCIL(20%), ONGC(10%), GAIL(10%), and NTPC(10.5%). More than Rs.28,000 crores were realized as a result of these sales till October, 2004. A notable point in this process has been that the Government could unlock about Rs.25,000 crores of its resources by sale of just 1% of its equity of Rs.1200 crores (out of Rs.1,09, 000 crores).
As per the data given in the PSE Survey Reports for the year 2004-05, the total capital employed in 227 public sector companies was Rs.5,04,370 crores and their net worth was Rs.3,41,544 crores. 143 of these companies made a profit of Rs.74,432 crores and 73 companies incurred a loss of Rs.9003 crores (despite infusion of Rs.5090 crores under restructuring process). 60% of the profit was earned by the petroleum & power companies. 77% of the loss was incurred by the Heavy Engineering, Textiles, Coals and Fertiliser companies. The Government equity as on 31-5-2005 in these companies was Rs.1,77,787 crores and the debt was Rs.2,33,568 crores. With share application money pendency of Rs.6494 crores, the total financial exposure of government amounted to Rs.3,57,849 crores.
The commonly known infirmities of the public sector companies are: Low rate of return; High expenditure; Resource crunch; Constricted growth; Complacency/Inefficiency/Indecisiveness; Political & Bureaucratic interference; More attention to procedural formalities than result achievement.
The disinvestment would provide the following advantages: Enable increased outlays to social & development sectors; Facilitate reduction of fiscal deficit; Boost domestic investment by putting downward pressure on interest rates; Improve depth & breadth of national capital markets; Strengthens commercial focus; Improve management discipline & efficiency; Generate competitive environment; Enable objective regulation & control by the government; Enable achievement of technological excellence; Enable achievement of higher growth rate, higher productivity and higher job growth; Enable national industries compete globally.
While steering the arduous programme of public sector reforms quite successfully, the Vajpayee government took due care to protect the interest of the employees and due to subsequent improvement of the financial health of the divested companies, the impending loss of employment could get averted. Unfortunately, the coming in of the UPA government put a complete halt to this process and currently the situation is so bad that many government companies are in queue with their financial restructuring demands because of heavy losses. The unlocking of substantial public resources during the Vajpayee regime had visible impact in the field of infrastructure development as well as in the social, health & education sectors which got terribly retarded during the current UPA regime. It will not be an exaggeration to say that the UPA government, comprising pseudo-economists, has reversed the process of ‘Reforms’ in India and to top it all has seriously added to the woes of common man due to ever rising inflation & price rise. The only silver lining now is the coming in of Advani regime which not only can ensure economic/social development but also can prevent the disintegration of the country due to internal & external threats, generated & boosted by the corrupt/weak Manmohan Singh government.
The context prevailing at the time India attained independence, necessitated State involvement in various commercial activities. Post war economic depression had dampened the spirit of the private entrepreneurs and the task of reconstruction could be best undertaken by greater involvement of the State. Therefore, the Industrial Policy Resolution of 1948 adopted by Government of India stated as under:
Ø Complete State monopolies in the following sectors:
· Manufacture of arms & ammunition;
· Production & control of atomic energy;
· Ownership & management of Railways;
Ø 6 Basic Industries- Steel, Coal, Aircraft & Ship, Telegraph/ Wireless apparatus- to be developed in Public Sector;
Ø Other areas to be left to Private Sector under State Controlled & Regulated Economy.
5 Public sector companies with equity contribution of R.29 crores from Government of India came into being by 1951. The 1956 Industrial Policy Resolution of Government of India had the following main features:
Ø Concept of Mixed Economy
Ø Industries categorised into three groups:
· Exclusive State preserves: In addition to the 6 sectors mentioned in 1948 Resolution, 3 more added, namely, Zink, Copper and Lead;
· Concurrent/Joint/Mixed-Alluminium, Fertilizers, Other Minerals, Machine tools, Chemical industries, Road & Sea Transport;
· Private sector under regulatory mechanism of the State.
Despite the concept of mixed economy, the growth in the number of public sector companies continued unabated (Figures in bracket indicates financial involvement of the Central Government)- 21 in 1956 (Rs.81 crores), 47 in 1961 (Rs.948 crores), 73 in 1966 (Rs.2400), 84 in 1969 (Rs.3900 crores), 122 in 1974 (Rs.6200 crores), 169 in 1979 (Rs.15000 crores), 215 in 1985 (Rs.42000 crores), 244 in 1990 (Rs.99000 crores), 246 in 1992 (Rs.1,35000 crores) and 240 as on 31st March, 2000 (Rs.2,52,500 crores). Owing to the leftist’s pressure, the phenomenal growth of public sector companies, both in terms of number and financial involvement, occurred during the regime of Indira Gandhi,. Apart from nationalization of Banks, there was a spate of creation of all kinds of companies in state sector many of which later proved great liability to the exchequer.
The serious financial crisis of 1990-91 forced the government to adopt the 1991 Liberlisation Policy having following features:
Ø Deregulation/End of License Raj;
Ø Focus public sector on strategic, hi-tech and essential infrastructure;
Ø Selective opening of ‘Exclusive State Preserves’ to private sector;
Ø List of industries reserved for public sector reduced from 17 to 8 (further reduced in 1993 to 6);
Ø De-reservation of mining activity- coal extraction permitted for captive use by user industries;
Ø Private sector investment permitted in oil exploration & refining, roads, telecom and power generation;
Ø Divesting 20% equity in selected Public Sector Enterprises;
Ø Involvement of Financial Institutions/Mutual Fund Institutions offering shares to employees at a discount.
The selective disinvestment of minority shares was undertaken from 1991 onwards as follows: In 1991-92, minority shares of 47 companies were sold by auction method in bundles of “very good”, “good” and “average” categories; In 1992-93, shares of 35 companies were sold separately (without bundling) by auction method; In 1993-94, equity of 7 companies sold by open auction; In 1994-95, shares of 13 companies were sold by open auction; In 1995-96, equity of 4 companies auctioned while piggy backed IDBI for the 5th company; During 1996-99, GDR issue for 9 companies done in international market. More than Rs.19,000 crores were realized in this entire sale process.
Consequent upon the acceptance of recommendations of the Disinvestment Commission, the strategic sale of 74% equity in Modern Foods Ltd. was completed in 1999-2000, followed by Lagan Jute (60%), BALCO (51%), CMC (51%), CMC(IPO-26.25%), HTL (74%), VSNL(25% out of 52.97% equity held by Govt.), IBP(33.58% out of 59.58% held by Govt.), IBP(IPO-26%), PPL(74%), HZL(26% out of 75.92% held by Govt.), JESSOP(72%), IPCL(26% out of 59.95% held by Govt.), IPCL(IPO-28.95%), 19 Hotels of ITDC(all loss making), 3 Hotels(2 loss making) of HCI (Air India subsidiary), Maruti(4.2% out of 49.74%) and IPOs of Maruti(27,5%), DCIL(20%), ONGC(10%), GAIL(10%), and NTPC(10.5%). More than Rs.28,000 crores were realized as a result of these sales till October, 2004. A notable point in this process has been that the Government could unlock about Rs.25,000 crores of its resources by sale of just 1% of its equity of Rs.1200 crores (out of Rs.1,09, 000 crores).
As per the data given in the PSE Survey Reports for the year 2004-05, the total capital employed in 227 public sector companies was Rs.5,04,370 crores and their net worth was Rs.3,41,544 crores. 143 of these companies made a profit of Rs.74,432 crores and 73 companies incurred a loss of Rs.9003 crores (despite infusion of Rs.5090 crores under restructuring process). 60% of the profit was earned by the petroleum & power companies. 77% of the loss was incurred by the Heavy Engineering, Textiles, Coals and Fertiliser companies. The Government equity as on 31-5-2005 in these companies was Rs.1,77,787 crores and the debt was Rs.2,33,568 crores. With share application money pendency of Rs.6494 crores, the total financial exposure of government amounted to Rs.3,57,849 crores.
The commonly known infirmities of the public sector companies are: Low rate of return; High expenditure; Resource crunch; Constricted growth; Complacency/Inefficiency/Indecisiveness; Political & Bureaucratic interference; More attention to procedural formalities than result achievement.
The disinvestment would provide the following advantages: Enable increased outlays to social & development sectors; Facilitate reduction of fiscal deficit; Boost domestic investment by putting downward pressure on interest rates; Improve depth & breadth of national capital markets; Strengthens commercial focus; Improve management discipline & efficiency; Generate competitive environment; Enable objective regulation & control by the government; Enable achievement of technological excellence; Enable achievement of higher growth rate, higher productivity and higher job growth; Enable national industries compete globally.
While steering the arduous programme of public sector reforms quite successfully, the Vajpayee government took due care to protect the interest of the employees and due to subsequent improvement of the financial health of the divested companies, the impending loss of employment could get averted. Unfortunately, the coming in of the UPA government put a complete halt to this process and currently the situation is so bad that many government companies are in queue with their financial restructuring demands because of heavy losses. The unlocking of substantial public resources during the Vajpayee regime had visible impact in the field of infrastructure development as well as in the social, health & education sectors which got terribly retarded during the current UPA regime. It will not be an exaggeration to say that the UPA government, comprising pseudo-economists, has reversed the process of ‘Reforms’ in India and to top it all has seriously added to the woes of common man due to ever rising inflation & price rise. The only silver lining now is the coming in of Advani regime which not only can ensure economic/social development but also can prevent the disintegration of the country due to internal & external threats, generated & boosted by the corrupt/weak Manmohan Singh government.
Nehru,s Legacy
Nehru’s Legacy--Numerous Issues out of Non-issues and further compounding to Nation’s jeopardy
The euphoria of attaining independence on the 15th August 1947 blurred the ability of many Indians to visualize the large ‘plethora of problems’ that were being bequeathed to them by the so called architect of India’s freedom & democracy- Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru. It is well documented historical fact that the attainment of independence was the fructification of the undaunted efforts made by leaders of all groups/class/creed/caste/community and the masses at large. In this behalf the contribution of ‘Naram Dal’ (Non-violent Movement led by Mahatma Gandhi) was as significant as that of the ‘Garam Dal’ (Direct Action believers led by Subhash Chander Bose) and several others not catagorised as either. It would be a fallacy to draw a clear cut line and place each of the lower rung leaders in one or the other category, because their approach varied from time to time and event to event. However, after the ‘Quit India’ movement in 1942 and the emergence of ‘Azad Hind Fauj’, the colonial rulers had seen the writings on the wall quite clearly and started making visible gestures & postures to finally vacate their unauthorized occupation of the Indian soil enabling attainment of independence. Sensing the air, the prospective leaders of the ‘soil’ started dreaming of occupying the ‘Ruler’s Throne’. It would not be an exaggeration to say that Pt. Nehru had started projecting himself as the PM-in-waiting despite of the fact that Mahatma Gandhi had amply indicated his desire to entrust this onerous responsibility (1st PM of independent India) to Sardar Patel- to whom goes the credit of integrating major part of India by merging 531 erstwhile princely States and thereby reducing the ‘plethora of problems’ for the country. Owing to the threatening postures of Nehru, Mahatma (with strong support of Sardar) finally gave in with a heavy heart and let Nehru fulfill his insatiable ambition of becoming the first Prime Minister of India with the condition that eminent & capable persons (from various other organization) like Dr. Shyama Prashad Mukerjee would also be inducted into the cabinet and that the most sensitive portfolio like Home would be entrusted to Sardar Patel.
Partition: The first and the foremost problem was the acceptance of India’s partition despite Mahatma’s emphatic assertion of ‘Partition over my dead body’. Some sections of the polity believe that the personal ambition of Nehru contributed significantly to this disastrous decision. The post independence history of 60 years would not let anyone believe the pretext that ‘the Partition would eliminate the communal strife’. The facts & figures about the population of each community (Hindus and Muslims) in India and Pakistan establish beyond doubt that the Nehru-Liyaqat Pact- aimed at protecting the minority communities in respective countries- has remained grossly one sided i.e. the Hindu population in Pakistan & Bangladesh has reduced to a couple of Lakhs from 2.40 Crores (at the time of partition) and on the other hand the Muslim population in India has increased to more than 15 Crores from 3 crores (at the time of partition)-more than 5 times as compared to less than 3 times increase in the total population of India. In this context, it needs to be remembered that Dr.Shyama Prashad Mukerjee quit as Minister (for Industries) from the Nehru cabinet on the issue of large scale massacre (accompanied with forced migration) of Hindus in the then East Pakistan. To compound the issue further, Nehru did not pay any heed to very practical & concrete suggestions of Dr.Mukerjee and instead wasted his energy in dubbing the ‘Sincere efforts of RSS/Bhartiya Jan Sangh to strengthen the foundations of Indian Nationalism & National Character’ as communal—a charge emanating more out of jealousy & ‘threat perception to his hegemony’ from the towering personalities of leaders like Dr.Mukerjee and Shri Guruji (M.S.Golwaker).
Kashmir Issue: That partition was a serious blunder proved soon with the Pakistani intrusion into Kashmir with colossal violation of not only the ‘Treaties & Agreements’ but most seriously the ‘Human Rights’. Despite having caught unaware, the Indian Armed Forces countered the attack and prevented total capture of Kashmir valley but one third Kashmir got forcibly occupied by the Pakistanis and later named as ‘Azad Kashmir’. The first seeds of ‘Appeasement Policy’ in independent India were sown by Nehru when he became soft on our legitimate claims over the so called ‘Azad Kashmir’, unauthorizedly occupied by Pakistan. The matter was further compounded by referring this issue to the UN- an act solely attributable to Nehru (through his Radio Speech), much against the advice/wish of the national polity duly & emphatically projected by Sardar Patel. Further complications of this issue occurred due to incorporation of Article 370 in the Indian Constitution, granting special status (purely as a temporary measure) to the State of Jammu & Kashmir. It is a well documented fact that this was done at the personal insistence of Nehru, though Gopalaswamy Aiyyangar and Sardar Patel amongst several others strongly opposed it. The great visionary & real nationalist, Dr.Shyama Prashad Mukerjee not only protested against this ‘disintegrative approach’ but ultimately sacrificed his life (intriguingly arrested on entering J&K and thereafter mysteriously dying in custody) to undo: ‘requirement of entry permit’; ‘institution of PM instead of CM in the State of J&K’; ‘Separate Flag instead of National Flag in the State of J&K’: thereby fulfilling his 3/4th promise to the people of India as expressed in his slogan—‘Ek Desh mein do vidhan (Art.370 and Permit requirement), do Pradhan, do Nishan, Nahin Chalega Nahin Chalega’. Except Art.370 all the rest were fulfilled immediately after his martyrdom. Nehru did not pay any heed to the well founded warning about the questionable national loyalties of Sheikh Mohammed Abdulla which later proved true and Abdulla had to be put behind the bar for anti-nationalism. That Nehru did not let an inquiry to be held in the custodial death of Dr.Mukerjee, was against the norms of justice & fairplay and the reasons for this omission were best known to him only. How big & monstrous was this blunder can be aptly gauged from the current happenings: withdrawal of a legal order alloting a miniscule piece of land, for management by the Amarnath Shrine Board, to facilitate the ‘Yatra’ (by Hindus) in a country inhabited by 82% Hindus where a ‘Huj Terminal’ facility and the ‘Huj House’ stand especially created in the country to facilitate the ‘Huj Yatra’ (by Muslims); open display of anti-national loyalties by the protesters in Srinagar with Pakistani Flag in their hands which has been clearly telecast by the national and the international TV Channels; undertaking of the ‘Muzaferabad march’ by the protesters in Srinagar; massacre of Hindus in Kashmir and creation of a dreadful atmosphere forcing the Kashmiri Pandit to flee and become refugees outside J&K; repeated ‘terrorist strikes’ killing several innocents and the army/police personnel; repeated incursions by Pakistan (though getting humiliated defeats every time) into J&K with the nefarious design of laying unlawful & unfounded claims over Kashmir.
Corruption: Social & Cultural organizations contribute more in building the moral fiber of a society as they act the guides & trend setters of the political parties. RSS is one such organization in our country which has established its credentials as an apolitical body sincerely devoted to the cause of building ‘national character’ and strengthening ‘nationalism’. Unfortunately, Nehru motivated purely on the basis of his personal hatred, started the vilification campaign against RSS and falsely attributed the murder of Mahatma Gandhi to this pious organization (despite strong disagreement of Sardar), and banned it, putting august persons of Shri Guruji’s stature in jail. RSS got more than vindicated when later on the flimsy excuse of ‘not having a written constitution’ was stated by the Nehru Govt. as the reason for their unlawful action against this organisation. The propaganda (branding RSS as communal & anti-national) perpetrated through both the Congress party-mechanism as well as the Govt.-machinery was made mischievously so aggressive that people got wrongly swept by it to the extent of completely clouding the truth and the realty of the ground situation. In the garb of this propaganda, the corruption spreaded in the country a mushroom-like manner, from top to bottom. Nehru shielded the corrupt despite clear-cut indictments by the successive ‘Enquiry Commissions’, thereby totally destroying the moral fiber of the Indian Polity. The ‘license-permit raj’ aggravated the corruption problem to extremely serious proportions reaching its culminations in ‘JMM Bribery case’ and the‘Cash for Votes’-like happenings, incidentally both occurring under the Congress-led regimes.
Unemployment & Poverty: Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of Nation, had through and through propagated the idea of ‘Little Indian Republics’, thereby meaning that the each of the Indian Villages shall be developed in ‘Swadeshi’ manner to turn them into ‘Self-reliant’ entities vis-à-vis the mega models of Westernisation which are antithetical to the Indian traditions & ethos. Dr.Shyama Prashad Mukerjee, as the Industry Minister of the first Indian Cabinet of free India, always insisted on promotion of ‘Cottage & Small’ industries (except for Railways and Fertilisers) to generate maximum employment opportunities and also remain within our financial resources (keeping external debt burden the least), but Nehru had personal fancy for ‘Westernisation’ and the Heavy Industries which proved disastrous for the nation resulting in colossal unemployment and heavy indebtedness. By completely ignoring the sane advice of Dr.Mukerjee and others the problem of unemployment and the connected problem of poverty got compounded seriously.
Lower Priority to Agriculture: At the time of attaining independence, 70% of the population in India depended on Agriculture for their livelihood and further, the country was deficient in food production for meeting the national requirement, forcing dependence on imports. Such a situation called for top priority to Agriculture in our National Plans & Policy. Unfortunately, Nehru getting blindly swayed & enamored by the ‘Western Model’ kept Agriculture at lower ebb and went full throttled after Heavy & Large Industry which ultimately (prior to ‘Green Revolution’) brought the country to the brink of starvation and the total dependence on PL 480-a string-attached food grains-aid programme of USA. It is well known that the policy initiatives bear fruits in due course of time and since the agricultural policies & plans initiated by Nehru were faulty, the country had to ultimately witness farmer’s suicides in large number, which is nothing less than ‘national shame’.
Miscellaneous: The problems like ‘Price Rise’, ‘Inflation’, ‘Internal security’ and ‘External Security’ were significantly seeded during the early post-independence period due to the wrong/faulty policy/planning initiatives. There was no perspective of financial prudence despite consistent rise of inflation, remaining mostly in double digits. There was colossal looseness in exercising control over ‘hoarding & black marketing’ which resulted in terrible and continuous price rise. Policy of ‘appeasement & vote-bank politics’ was followed so blindly & thoughtlessly that instead of putting the minorities in the main national stream it resulted in emergence of terrorism in every nook & corner of the country. The euphoria created by the slogan of ‘Hindi-Chini Bhai-Bhai’ made Nehru completely oblivious to the repeated warnings (which proved prophetic) loudly & clearly aired by Shri Guruji and Dr.Mukerjee against the ill designs of China, resulting in loss of strategic territories much to the detriment of India.
Will there ever be an objective & nationalistic analysis of the entire gamut of issues to let the national polity see the truth and not get carried by the unfounded propaganda.
The euphoria of attaining independence on the 15th August 1947 blurred the ability of many Indians to visualize the large ‘plethora of problems’ that were being bequeathed to them by the so called architect of India’s freedom & democracy- Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru. It is well documented historical fact that the attainment of independence was the fructification of the undaunted efforts made by leaders of all groups/class/creed/caste/community and the masses at large. In this behalf the contribution of ‘Naram Dal’ (Non-violent Movement led by Mahatma Gandhi) was as significant as that of the ‘Garam Dal’ (Direct Action believers led by Subhash Chander Bose) and several others not catagorised as either. It would be a fallacy to draw a clear cut line and place each of the lower rung leaders in one or the other category, because their approach varied from time to time and event to event. However, after the ‘Quit India’ movement in 1942 and the emergence of ‘Azad Hind Fauj’, the colonial rulers had seen the writings on the wall quite clearly and started making visible gestures & postures to finally vacate their unauthorized occupation of the Indian soil enabling attainment of independence. Sensing the air, the prospective leaders of the ‘soil’ started dreaming of occupying the ‘Ruler’s Throne’. It would not be an exaggeration to say that Pt. Nehru had started projecting himself as the PM-in-waiting despite of the fact that Mahatma Gandhi had amply indicated his desire to entrust this onerous responsibility (1st PM of independent India) to Sardar Patel- to whom goes the credit of integrating major part of India by merging 531 erstwhile princely States and thereby reducing the ‘plethora of problems’ for the country. Owing to the threatening postures of Nehru, Mahatma (with strong support of Sardar) finally gave in with a heavy heart and let Nehru fulfill his insatiable ambition of becoming the first Prime Minister of India with the condition that eminent & capable persons (from various other organization) like Dr. Shyama Prashad Mukerjee would also be inducted into the cabinet and that the most sensitive portfolio like Home would be entrusted to Sardar Patel.
Partition: The first and the foremost problem was the acceptance of India’s partition despite Mahatma’s emphatic assertion of ‘Partition over my dead body’. Some sections of the polity believe that the personal ambition of Nehru contributed significantly to this disastrous decision. The post independence history of 60 years would not let anyone believe the pretext that ‘the Partition would eliminate the communal strife’. The facts & figures about the population of each community (Hindus and Muslims) in India and Pakistan establish beyond doubt that the Nehru-Liyaqat Pact- aimed at protecting the minority communities in respective countries- has remained grossly one sided i.e. the Hindu population in Pakistan & Bangladesh has reduced to a couple of Lakhs from 2.40 Crores (at the time of partition) and on the other hand the Muslim population in India has increased to more than 15 Crores from 3 crores (at the time of partition)-more than 5 times as compared to less than 3 times increase in the total population of India. In this context, it needs to be remembered that Dr.Shyama Prashad Mukerjee quit as Minister (for Industries) from the Nehru cabinet on the issue of large scale massacre (accompanied with forced migration) of Hindus in the then East Pakistan. To compound the issue further, Nehru did not pay any heed to very practical & concrete suggestions of Dr.Mukerjee and instead wasted his energy in dubbing the ‘Sincere efforts of RSS/Bhartiya Jan Sangh to strengthen the foundations of Indian Nationalism & National Character’ as communal—a charge emanating more out of jealousy & ‘threat perception to his hegemony’ from the towering personalities of leaders like Dr.Mukerjee and Shri Guruji (M.S.Golwaker).
Kashmir Issue: That partition was a serious blunder proved soon with the Pakistani intrusion into Kashmir with colossal violation of not only the ‘Treaties & Agreements’ but most seriously the ‘Human Rights’. Despite having caught unaware, the Indian Armed Forces countered the attack and prevented total capture of Kashmir valley but one third Kashmir got forcibly occupied by the Pakistanis and later named as ‘Azad Kashmir’. The first seeds of ‘Appeasement Policy’ in independent India were sown by Nehru when he became soft on our legitimate claims over the so called ‘Azad Kashmir’, unauthorizedly occupied by Pakistan. The matter was further compounded by referring this issue to the UN- an act solely attributable to Nehru (through his Radio Speech), much against the advice/wish of the national polity duly & emphatically projected by Sardar Patel. Further complications of this issue occurred due to incorporation of Article 370 in the Indian Constitution, granting special status (purely as a temporary measure) to the State of Jammu & Kashmir. It is a well documented fact that this was done at the personal insistence of Nehru, though Gopalaswamy Aiyyangar and Sardar Patel amongst several others strongly opposed it. The great visionary & real nationalist, Dr.Shyama Prashad Mukerjee not only protested against this ‘disintegrative approach’ but ultimately sacrificed his life (intriguingly arrested on entering J&K and thereafter mysteriously dying in custody) to undo: ‘requirement of entry permit’; ‘institution of PM instead of CM in the State of J&K’; ‘Separate Flag instead of National Flag in the State of J&K’: thereby fulfilling his 3/4th promise to the people of India as expressed in his slogan—‘Ek Desh mein do vidhan (Art.370 and Permit requirement), do Pradhan, do Nishan, Nahin Chalega Nahin Chalega’. Except Art.370 all the rest were fulfilled immediately after his martyrdom. Nehru did not pay any heed to the well founded warning about the questionable national loyalties of Sheikh Mohammed Abdulla which later proved true and Abdulla had to be put behind the bar for anti-nationalism. That Nehru did not let an inquiry to be held in the custodial death of Dr.Mukerjee, was against the norms of justice & fairplay and the reasons for this omission were best known to him only. How big & monstrous was this blunder can be aptly gauged from the current happenings: withdrawal of a legal order alloting a miniscule piece of land, for management by the Amarnath Shrine Board, to facilitate the ‘Yatra’ (by Hindus) in a country inhabited by 82% Hindus where a ‘Huj Terminal’ facility and the ‘Huj House’ stand especially created in the country to facilitate the ‘Huj Yatra’ (by Muslims); open display of anti-national loyalties by the protesters in Srinagar with Pakistani Flag in their hands which has been clearly telecast by the national and the international TV Channels; undertaking of the ‘Muzaferabad march’ by the protesters in Srinagar; massacre of Hindus in Kashmir and creation of a dreadful atmosphere forcing the Kashmiri Pandit to flee and become refugees outside J&K; repeated ‘terrorist strikes’ killing several innocents and the army/police personnel; repeated incursions by Pakistan (though getting humiliated defeats every time) into J&K with the nefarious design of laying unlawful & unfounded claims over Kashmir.
Corruption: Social & Cultural organizations contribute more in building the moral fiber of a society as they act the guides & trend setters of the political parties. RSS is one such organization in our country which has established its credentials as an apolitical body sincerely devoted to the cause of building ‘national character’ and strengthening ‘nationalism’. Unfortunately, Nehru motivated purely on the basis of his personal hatred, started the vilification campaign against RSS and falsely attributed the murder of Mahatma Gandhi to this pious organization (despite strong disagreement of Sardar), and banned it, putting august persons of Shri Guruji’s stature in jail. RSS got more than vindicated when later on the flimsy excuse of ‘not having a written constitution’ was stated by the Nehru Govt. as the reason for their unlawful action against this organisation. The propaganda (branding RSS as communal & anti-national) perpetrated through both the Congress party-mechanism as well as the Govt.-machinery was made mischievously so aggressive that people got wrongly swept by it to the extent of completely clouding the truth and the realty of the ground situation. In the garb of this propaganda, the corruption spreaded in the country a mushroom-like manner, from top to bottom. Nehru shielded the corrupt despite clear-cut indictments by the successive ‘Enquiry Commissions’, thereby totally destroying the moral fiber of the Indian Polity. The ‘license-permit raj’ aggravated the corruption problem to extremely serious proportions reaching its culminations in ‘JMM Bribery case’ and the‘Cash for Votes’-like happenings, incidentally both occurring under the Congress-led regimes.
Unemployment & Poverty: Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of Nation, had through and through propagated the idea of ‘Little Indian Republics’, thereby meaning that the each of the Indian Villages shall be developed in ‘Swadeshi’ manner to turn them into ‘Self-reliant’ entities vis-à-vis the mega models of Westernisation which are antithetical to the Indian traditions & ethos. Dr.Shyama Prashad Mukerjee, as the Industry Minister of the first Indian Cabinet of free India, always insisted on promotion of ‘Cottage & Small’ industries (except for Railways and Fertilisers) to generate maximum employment opportunities and also remain within our financial resources (keeping external debt burden the least), but Nehru had personal fancy for ‘Westernisation’ and the Heavy Industries which proved disastrous for the nation resulting in colossal unemployment and heavy indebtedness. By completely ignoring the sane advice of Dr.Mukerjee and others the problem of unemployment and the connected problem of poverty got compounded seriously.
Lower Priority to Agriculture: At the time of attaining independence, 70% of the population in India depended on Agriculture for their livelihood and further, the country was deficient in food production for meeting the national requirement, forcing dependence on imports. Such a situation called for top priority to Agriculture in our National Plans & Policy. Unfortunately, Nehru getting blindly swayed & enamored by the ‘Western Model’ kept Agriculture at lower ebb and went full throttled after Heavy & Large Industry which ultimately (prior to ‘Green Revolution’) brought the country to the brink of starvation and the total dependence on PL 480-a string-attached food grains-aid programme of USA. It is well known that the policy initiatives bear fruits in due course of time and since the agricultural policies & plans initiated by Nehru were faulty, the country had to ultimately witness farmer’s suicides in large number, which is nothing less than ‘national shame’.
Miscellaneous: The problems like ‘Price Rise’, ‘Inflation’, ‘Internal security’ and ‘External Security’ were significantly seeded during the early post-independence period due to the wrong/faulty policy/planning initiatives. There was no perspective of financial prudence despite consistent rise of inflation, remaining mostly in double digits. There was colossal looseness in exercising control over ‘hoarding & black marketing’ which resulted in terrible and continuous price rise. Policy of ‘appeasement & vote-bank politics’ was followed so blindly & thoughtlessly that instead of putting the minorities in the main national stream it resulted in emergence of terrorism in every nook & corner of the country. The euphoria created by the slogan of ‘Hindi-Chini Bhai-Bhai’ made Nehru completely oblivious to the repeated warnings (which proved prophetic) loudly & clearly aired by Shri Guruji and Dr.Mukerjee against the ill designs of China, resulting in loss of strategic territories much to the detriment of India.
Will there ever be an objective & nationalistic analysis of the entire gamut of issues to let the national polity see the truth and not get carried by the unfounded propaganda.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)