Thursday, September 27, 2012

PM speech to the nation - Comment to Reply him

My dear brothers and sisters,
I am speaking to you tonight to explain the reasons for some important economic policy decisions the government has recently taken. Some political parties have opposed them. You have a right to know the truth about why we have taken these decisions.
No government likes to impose burdens on the common man. Our Government has been voted to office twice to protect the interests of the aam admi.
At the same time, it is the responsibility of the government to defend the national interest, and protect the long term future of our people. This means that we must ensure that the economy grows rapidly, and that this generates enough productive jobs for the youth of our country. Rapid growth is also necessary to raise the revenues we need to finance our programmes in education, health care, housing and rural employment.
The challenge is that we have to do this at a time when the world economy is experiencing great difficulty. The United States and Europe are struggling to deal with an economic slowdown and financial crisis. Even China is slowing down.
We too have been affected, though I believe we have been able to limit the effect of the global crisis.
We are at a point where we can reverse the slowdown in our growth. We need a revival in investor confidence domestically and globally. The decisions we have taken recently are necessary for this purpose.
Let me begin with the rise in diesel prices and the cap on LPG cylinders.
We import almost 80% of our oil, and oil prices in the world market have increased sharply in the past four years. We did not pass on most of this price rise to you, so that we could protect you from hardship to the maximum extent possible.
As a result, the subsidy on petroleum products has grown enormously. It was Rs. 1 lakh 40 thousand crores last year. If we had not acted, it would have been over Rs. 200,000 crores this year.
Where would the money for this have come from? Money does not grow on trees. If we had not acted, it would have meant a higher fiscal deficit, that is, an unsustainable increase in government expenditure vis-a-vis government income. If unchecked, this would lead to a further steep rise in prices and a loss of confidence in our economy. The prices of essential commodities would rise faster. Both domestic as well as foreign investors would be reluctant to invest in our economy. Interest rates would rise. Our companies would not be able to borrow abroad. Unemployment would increase.
The last time we faced this problem was in 1991. Nobody was willing to lend us even small amounts of money then. We came out of that crisis by taking strong, resolute steps. You can see the positive results of those steps. We are not in that situation today, but we must act before people lose confidence in our economy.

I know what happened in 1991 and I would be failing in my duty as Prime Minister of this great country if I did not take strong preventive action.
The world is not kind to those who do not tackle their own problems. Many European countries are in this position today. They cannot pay their bills and are looking to others for help. They are having to cut wages or pensions to satisfy potential lenders.
I am determined to see that India will not be pushed into that situation. But I can succeed only if I can persuade you to understand why we had to act.
We raised the price of diesel by just Rs. 5 per litre instead of the Rs 17 that was needed to cut all losses on diesel. Much of diesel is used by big cars and SUVs owned by the rich and by factories and businesses. Should government run large fiscal deficits to subsidise them?
We reduced taxes on petrol by Rs. 5 per litre to prevent a rise in petrol prices. We did this so that the crores of middle class people who drive scooters and motorcycles are not hit further.
On LPG, we put a cap of 6 subsidised cylinders per year. Almost half of our people, who need our help the most, actually use only 6 cylinders or less. We have ensured they are not affected. Others will still get 6 subsidised cylinders, but they must pay a higher price for more.
We did not touch the price of kerosene which is consumed by the poor.
My Dear Brothers and Sisters,
You should know that even after the price increase, the prices of diesel and LPG in India are lower than those in Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Pakistan.
The total subsidy on petroleum products will still be Rs. 160 thousand crores. This is more than what we spend on Health and Education together. We held back from raising prices further because I hoped that oil prices would decline.
Let me now turn to the decision to allow foreign investment in retail trade. Some think it will hurt small traders.This is not true.
Organised, modern retailing is already present in our country and is growing. All our major cities have large retail chains. Our national capital, Delhi, has many new shopping centres. But it has also seen a three-fold increase in small shops in recent years.
In a growing economy, there is enough space for big and small to grow. The fear that small retailers will be wiped out is completely baseless.

We should also remember that the opening of organised retail to foreign investment will benefit our farmers. According to the regulations we have introduced, those who bring FDI have to invest 50% of their money in building new warehouses, cold-storages, and modern transport systems. This will help to ensure that a third of our fruits and vegetables, which at present are wasted because of storage and transit losses, actually reach the consumer. Wastage will go down; prices paid to farmers will go up; and prices paid by consumers will go down.
The growth of organised retail will also create millions of good quality new jobs.
We recognise that some political parties are opposed to this step. That is why State governments have been allowed to decide whether foreign investment in retail can come into their state. But one state should not stop another state from seeking a better life for its farmers, for its youth and for its consumers.
In 1991, when we opened India to foreign investment in manufacturing, many were worried. But today, Indian companies are competing effectively both at home and abroad, and they are investing around the world. More importantly, foreign companies are creating jobs for our youth -- in Information Technology, in steel, and in the auto industry. I am sure this will happen in retail trade as well.
My Dear Brothers and Sisters,
The UPA Government is the government of the aam aadmi.
In the past 8 years our economy has grown at a record annual rate of 8.2 per cent. We have ensured that poverty has declined much faster, agriculture has grown faster, and rural consumption per person has also grown faster.
We need to do more, and we will do more. But to achieve inclusiveness we need more growth. And we must avoid high fiscal deficits which cause a loss of confidence in our economy.
I promise you that I will do everything necessary to put our country back on the path of high and inclusive growth. But I need your support. Please do not be misled by those who want to confuse you by spreading fear and false information. The same tactics were adopted in 1991. They did not succeed then. They will not succeed now. I have full faith in the wisdom of the people of India.
We have much to do to protect the interests of our nation, and we must do it now. At times, we need to say "No" to the easy option and say "Yes" to the more difficult one. This happens to be one such occasion. The time has come for hard decisions. For this I need your trust, your understanding, and your cooperation.
As Prime Minister of this great country, I ask each one of you to strengthen my hands so that we can take our country forward and build a better and more prosperous future for ourselves and for the generations to come.
Jai Hind.

In the Name of the Poor - Review of NREGA by Surjit Bhalla

Marie Antoinette, the liberal and concerned queen of France, on seeing the poor and hungry masses demanding bread, said in a fit of charity — “let them eat cake”.
 
Member of the prestigious National Advisory Council (NAC) Jean Dreze surveyed the performance of the existing National Food For Work Programme (NFFWP) in July 2005 and concluded that the performance was “alarming”. The work guidelines were not being enforced, and the workers were not getting the minimum wage (only Rs 25 to Rs 30 a day). The major problem was with “muster rolls”. There was a lot of corruption, Dreze concluded.
 
To help provide cake to the needy, the UPA government introduced a replacement for the NFFWP in the form of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA). This act would right the wrongs of existing NFFWP programmes. Why would it right the wrongs? Because it would be implemented by committed experts rather than by corrupt government officials.

Given the lessons learnt from the failure of food-for-work programmes, the NREGA is seemingly a booming success. In April 2008, Phase 3 of the programme was introduced across 285 additional districts. With this addition, all the districts of India have been covered, and the government claims that 130 crore workdays were provided in 2007-08 at an average wage of Rs 75 per person, per day. Buoyed by this success, the NAC recommended, and obtained, an expansion of the NREGA programme to more than triple the 2007-08 allocation, to Rs 39,000 crore in 2010-11. Interestingly, the programme continues to be non-corrupt and as evidence, there is the fact that all the money allocated for 2010-11 has not been spent.
However, the government, and the NAC, are asking for more money to be spent on the NREGA. Is it the case that the poor are actually getting bread under the scheme? And how likely is it that after decades of poor implementation and corruption (recall that food-for-work programmes first started in 1973), Indian administrators have suddenly become efficient and non-corrupt?
As agreed by all, corruption is the number one issue facing the country. The biggest scam that the country has encountered, ever, is the telecom 2G scam, where rough estimates suggest that Rs 40,000 to Rs 50,000 crore were “lost”, disappeared into thin air, did not accrue to the government, etc. Thankfully, such scams come once a decade or less.
But the scams pertaining to national welfare schemes like the NREGA and the public distribution system of food (PDS) may annually be about the size of the 2G scam, if not more. I repeat — the flow of corruption money via operation of NREGA, PDS, fertiliser subsidy, kerosene subsidy, etc, may well be substantially in excess of Rs 40,000 crore a year, and well in excess of 1 per cent of GDP each year. This conclusion is not new — the late PM Rajiv Gandhi reached the same conclusion in 1985 when he claimed that only 15 per cent of the money meant for the poor reached the poor.
Future articles will look into the possible “leakages” in the PDS and other subsidy schemes. For the moment, the NREGA deserves a closer scrutiny. To date, all expert analyses of the NREGA programme have regurgitated the official ministry of rural development (MRD) data on the administration of the programme — presumably the same statistics that the NAC, Dreze and others use to conclude that the people, via the NREGA, are eating both bread and cake. Using these statistics may be akin to asking the accused to be the judge! Fortunately, there is data from outside of the MRD that can be used to test not only the veracity of the MRD claims, but also the efficacy of the old, much maligned (and rightly so) food-for-work programmes.
All of this is possible through use of the National Sample Survey for 2007-08 (July 2007 to June 2008). The following question was asked of all individuals in households covered by the survey: How many days in the preceding week did you work as a casual worker in a public works programme? The respondent days will be an upper-bound to the NREGA programme since there can be public works programmes that are not NREGA.
The results are the following. The government claims of 130 crore person days of work seem to be wildly exaggerated (interestingly, not dissimilar to the CAG claim that Rs 1.76 lakh crore were lost in the 2G scam, rather than the more realistic figure of Rs 40,000 crore). The NSS figure is 46 crore person days total and 38 crore in districts where the NREGA was operational. The NSS data can identify whether a household was poor or not according to the Tendulkar poverty line; the result — only 8.8 crore person days of the NREGA programme were availed by the poor.
One final statistic — for 285 Phase 3 districts, there was no NREGA between June 2007 and March 2008. Yet these districts had provided as much as 86 per cent of the workdays in non-NREGA programmes as was provided by NREGA after its implementation in April 2008.
A conservative estimate of the disappearance into thin air of money meant for the poor NREGA recipients in 2007-08 is about two-thirds of the money spent on the programme. Disappearance means money not accounted for by receipt, by the poor or the rich. It is unlikely that corruption in the NREGA has decreased in the last three years while having increased in all sectors of the economy. Which means that scam money in the NREGA, in just one year, 2010-11, is upwards of Rs 25,000 crore.

The writer is chairman of Oxus Investments, an emerging market advisory and fund management firm 
 
Martin Luther King, Jr.: "Take the first step in faith. You don't have to see the whole staircase, just take the first step."
Take the first step.............................................!!!!! 
 
Only way to Improve the Political Culture (i.e. dismantle - Money/Muscle Power, Vote Bank and Dynastic Politics) is that the best and the brightest will have to enter politics as they did prior to independence and during first two decade thereafter.

If not now ? If not you and I ?? Who?? But remember politics is a very hard and sustained work but is an opportunity, as a noble endeavour, to serve the people, society and the Nation

Lokpal Bill should provide for Lokayukta: Lok Satta

A delegation of the Lok Satta and the Foundation for Democratic Reforms has told the Rajya Sabha Select Committee on the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill that it shall include provisions for the constitution of Lokayukta at the State level. The States, however, may be given the option of constituting Lokayuktas.

The delegation, led by Lok Satta Party national President Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan impressed upon the committee headed by Mr. Satyavrat Chaturvedi that Parliament has power to legislate upon Lokayukta, considering that criminal law procedures and crime investigation come under Concurrent jurisdiction of the Center and States. Again under Article 253 of the Constitution, the Government of India is entitled to pass a law on corruption applicable throughout the country as it has become a signatory to the United
Nations' Convention against Corruption. The Union Government had in the past adopted Acts on human rights and money laundering applicable throughout the country in accordance with international treaties.
The delegation, which held detailed discussions lasting for about two hours with the committee on September 6, was convinced that the Select Committee members cutting across party lines were keen on adopting a
strong law to combat corruption.

The delegation underlined that all steps be taken to ensure that investigative agencies enjoy independence. Specifically, it suggested that Clause 6 A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act be dropped under which the Central Bureau of Investigation has to take prior Government permission before launching investigation against senior Government officials. The Central Vigilance Commission and not the Government shall be vested with the power to grant permission for investigations.

It also suggested amendment of Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act under which an investigating agency cannot prosecute a Government official without prior consent. The Lok Satta-FDR delegation suggested that the power to permit prosecution be taken away from the Government and entrusted to the Lokpal. The Lokpal will ascertain Government objections if any within a stipulated period and then decide on granting or denying permission for prosecution. All anti-corruption agencies at the State level by whatever name they go shall be brought under Lokayukta purview.

The delegation emphasized that there shall be stringent provisions for confiscation of property in proven corruption cases. It pointed out that the Supreme Court in 1988 upheld the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange
Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act of 1976 and suggested that there should be similar provisions for confiscation of property in corruption cases. The delegation cited instances of an NRI doctor couple and a former Illinois Governor being stripped of all of their ill-gotten wealth for indulging in fraud. In fact, the Law Commission had drafted a Bill containing such provisions for property forfeiture in corruption cases.

The delegation drew the committee's attention to certain omissions and commissions in the Bill. For instance, it has failed to bring public private partnerships involving allocation of public resources and creation of
monopolies under Lokpal purview. The Select Committee has to make up for the lapse.

Again, the Bill brings tens of thousands of institutions ranging from resident welfare societies to media houses and political parties under Lokpal purview. The provision not only makes the functioning of the Lokpal
unwieldy but also unconstitutional as it seeks to fetter the freedom of citizens for unrelated purposes.

The team that called on the Select Committee included Dr Ashwin Mahesh, (Lok Satta, Karnataka), Ms Ankita Verma (Lok Satta, Mumbai), Mr. Anurag Kejriwal (Lok Satta, Delhi), Mr. Senthil Kumar Arumugam (Lok Satta, Tamil Nadu), Mr. Sandeep Verma ( Lok Satta, Delhi) and Ms Tara Krishnaswamy (Lok Satta, Bangalore).

ADR’s appeal to CIC for declaring Political Parties as Public Authorities


Political Parties receive government funds, directly or indirectly, under following heads:
·         Tax Exemption provided to political parties
-          All the political parties have been claiming tax exemptions on 100% of their incomes, under the provisions of section 13A of the Income Tax Act.
-          The total tax exemptions received by six national parties during the 3 financial years beginning from FY 2006 to FY 2009 is Rs. 510.02 crores. The maximum tax exemption during this time period (FY 2006-2009) was received by INC, which is Rs. 300.92 crores, followed by BJP that enjoyed the concession of Rs. 141.25 crores.
-          The tax rebates enjoyed by four other national political parties during the same time period are as follows- BSP: Rs. 39.84 crores, CPI(M): Rs. 18.13 crores, CPI: Rs. .24 crores, NCP: Rs. 9.64 crores.

·         Free air time on Doordarshan and AIR to political parties during elections 
-          All political parties are provided free airtime on Doordarshan and All India Radio (AIR) during elections for canvassing purposes. Based on the data received under RTI we have been able to calculate only the revenue forgone by DD and AIR during LS 2009 elections and  the elections in the  5 states that were held during Jan-Mar 2012.
-          DD and AIR have different commercial rates for prime time and non prime time telecast and broadcast. We have conservatively calculated the revenue forgone, by the Government, by using the non-prime time commercial rates. Therefore, the actual revenue forgone by the Prasar Bharti would have been higher. We have used the conservative rates of non-prime time in calculating the revenue foregone by the state. The revenue foregone by the state actually could be much higher.
-          The free airtime provided to INC during the above mentioned two sets of elections is Rs. 8.42 crores followed by BJP that got airtime of worth Rs. 6.38 crores. For other political parties the corresponding figures are- BSP: Rs. 3.96 crores, CPI(M): Rs. 2.77 crores, CPI: Rs. 2.62 crores and NCP: Rs. 2.89 crores.

·         State funded electoral rolls provided to political parties during elections
-       Under the provisions of rules 11 and 12 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 two copies of the Electoral roll, one printed copy and another in CD are supplied to recognized political parties, free of cost, after draft and final publications.
-       It is normally understood that the Government spends only a trivial amount on the free supply of electoral rolls. However, according to our calculations the money spent is significant. We filed RTIs to various states in order to ascertain the cost per voter roll during the 2009 elections. We took a sample of 10 constituencies consisting of a range of constituencies varying from small to large constituencies.
-       One assumption we made was that the political parties received copies of electoral rolls only of those places where they actually fielded their candidates. Based on our calculations, the total amount spent by government, only during Lok Sabha elections of 2009, in providing electoral rolls to the six national political parties stands at Rs. 8.9 crores.
-       The maximum amount was spent on BSP i.e. Rs. 2.82 crores because it fielded the maximum number of candidates (500) during the LS elections of 2009. The corresponding figures for other national political parties are as follows- INC: Rs. 2.48 crores (440 candidates), BJP: Rs. 2.45 crores (433 candidates), CPI(M): Rs. .46 crores (82 candidates), CPI: Rs. .31 crores (56 candidates) and NCP: Rs. .38 crores (68 candidates).
·         State funding in the form of government land/offices provided to political parties
-          As per Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India, there is a well-defined policy for allotment of land to the political parties. Political parties, accordingly, have been allotted large sized plots of lands in Delhi.
-          We have attempted to value these plots of land using highly conservative rate taken from category ‘B’ of Delhi Circle Rates of Nov’ 2011. The real market rates are substantially higher than this category ‘B’ rate taken by us.
-          INC has been allotted the maximum land area of 18737 sq. m. followed by BJP that possesses 10410.8 sq. m. of land. The corresponding area figures of other national political parties are as follows- CPI(M): 3732 sq. m., CPI: 1500 sq m., NCP: 1000 sq. m. and BSP: 2000 sq. m.
-          Our calculations of these plots of land based on the above mentioned highly conservative rate show that the value of land held by INC stands at Rs. 231 crores and the worth of BJP held land is Rs. 117.35 crores. The values of land possessed by other parties are as follows-  CPI(M): Rs. 50.75 Crores, CPI: Rs. 16.91 Crores, NCP: Rs. 13.6 Crores and BSP: Rs. 27.20 Crores.
-          The cumulative value of the land that is in possession of these six national parties stands at Rs. 456.91 crores.
The details of above arguments have been provided in the elaborate report attached.
It is quite evident from these arguments that political parties receives substantial funding from government and hence they should be declared as public authorities in order to bring them under the purview of RTI.