. |
. |
EDITORIAL Deferment of power tariff hike from May 1 as announced earlier is a welcome decision. Chief Minister Dr Farooq Abdullah after his inter-action with Chamber of Commerce and Industry representatives is quite appreciative of the difficulties faced by the industry due to various distortions and infirmities in the power tariff which has already been hiked twice during the last year and a half. Frequent hikes even before absorbing the existing ones are counter-productive. The entire exercise should be such asto mitigate hardships faced by the industry and the consumers because power is..........more Conference for review of NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) has begun in New York. Such conference is held every five years for re-appraisal and carrying out amendments and/or additions to make the NPT more effective. There are a ...more |
|
Daunting challenges for the
president - elect of Russia Foreign advocates entry to
marginalise Indian lawyers The law does catch up Price of profligacy |
 |
||
EDITORIAL Deferment of power tariff hike from May 1 as announced earlier is a welcome decision. Chief Minister Dr Farooq Abdullah after his inter-action with Chamber of Commerce and Industry representatives is quite appreciative of the difficulties faced by the industry due to various distortions and infirmities in the power tariff which has already been hiked twice during the last year and a half. Frequent hikes even before absorbing the existing ones are counter-productive. The entire exercise should be such asto mitigate hardships faced by the industry and the consumers because power is an essential commodity by any reckoning. Nothing moves without power and it remains the mainstay of forward movement of all activities. Unfortunately, this State besides being backward and insurgency infested has failed miserably as regards such essential input like generation and supply of power to consumers of all hues. Power sector comes under the infrastructure sector and to remove deficit over the next decade the sector has been thrown open to multinationals and private entrepreneurs because Government simply does not have the funds needed for removing the shortfall and supply required quantity on demand. It is to be noted that during his various visits to cosmopolitan cities and interaction with prospective investors, Chief Minister Dr Farooq Abdullah did highlight availability of cheap power in required quantity as an instant incentive. It is regrettable that this poly has proved to be quite off-track. There has been the temptation to compare J&K power tariff with other States and justify enhancement to bring parity. Parity only in power tariff is a bad exercise. You also have to compare all other factors. These can be summed up as relative backwardness of the State, special category status making it eligible for 90% grant and only 10% loan with regard to Central funds, almost negligible industrial base, reluctance of prospective investors, paying capacity of the hapless citizens, availability of power and above all insurgency that has even otherwise made life quite hellish. Surely, all such factors are not prevalent in other northern States but Himachal does have some common denominators like special category State, backwardness, vast hydel potential and lack of industrial base. It is therefore natural to have some sort of comparison with the power tariff charged in Himachal and the one being charged besides the enhancement since held in abeyance. One most interesting aspect of HP power tariff is that whenever it is enhanced, the last hike took place 2 years back, it is nominal increase that can be easily absorbed by the consumers. For instance HP has announced hike from May 1 and the increase thus effected is only in terms of a few paise per unit. The beauty lies in sparing the pettiest consumer upto 45 units which even after enhancement pays only 70 paise per unit. Incidentally 65% of the domestic consumers in Himachal belong to the petty-consumer category. Even for industry the hike is nominal ranging in paise only and not in rupees. The best part of it is that there is no compulsary minimum charges as exists in this State and the entire supply and tariff is metered. Chief Minister do deserve appreciation for not sitting on prestige. He has now announced a committee that would go into entire tariff structure particularly load based minimum charges even when power is not supplied. CM also deserves a pat for describing Jammu as having vast industrial potential and calibre of Jammu entrepreneurs to tap such potential. The committee must go through all the relevant aspects as highlighted by the Chamber such as further increase in power tariff, minimum power charges, uniform power tariff for old and new units, reforms in power sector, increase in its generation/availability besides improving transmission and distribution of power. One hopes that hard-pressed citizens and industry will not be burdened further and spared hike until fresh appraisal and total revamp to ensure adequate and qualitative power to consumers of all hues. Conference for review of NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) has begun in New York. Such conference is held every five years for re-appraisal and carrying out amendments and/or additions to make the NPT more effective. There are a total of 187 signatories to the treaty. The objectives of this treaty are quite noble but over the years these have been tempered wholesale to defeat the purpose for which NPT was originally conceived and became an attractive proposition for as many as 187 UN member countries who signed it on the dotted line. Most of them however are now regretful in that none of the objectives outlined in it have been fulfilled. In fact, the NPT itself has been proliferated recklessly by none other than the five-nuclear haves. The entire thrust of these five nuclear haves who are also the permanent members of UN Security Council namely USA, Russia, France, Great Britain and China is in the direction of monopolising their nuclear possessions and denying others similar right. It stands duly manifested with the last review carried out five year back which declared it for all time to come that only these five countries shall have the nuclear status and no other country would be allowed to have this status. Checking proliferation is onething. It is for the good of mankind. It thus transpires that the main objective is forgotten which happens to be steps for universal nuclear disarmament gradually. Experience and actions of the big-wigs however speak it otherwise. CTBT is the offshoot of NPT. Till this date CTBT has not been ratified by USA although it still wants other countries to sign and ratify it. China, another P-5 nuclear have, has also not ratified it. Russia has done it just three days back but the reasons thereof relate to putting America under pressure and in the process win support of the majority of world community. When America and China do not ratify it, they forefeit the right to ask others to sign it. The CTBT thus is as good as killed. Further, even those countries like France who signed and ratified it did so only after they had mastered the simulated test techniques. Second noticeable aspect relates to continued improvements being effected in the nuclear arsenals. America has already announced that all its 6000 nuclear warheads are being replaced with latest versions. Another offshoot of NPT was Start-I and Start-II treaties. It meant reduction in total nuclear weapons possessed by the Soviet Union (now Russia) and USA. In practice however they have not destroyed a single nuclear weapon. It is no because Start-II Treaty was not ratified by Russia although it was signed in 1970. It has been ratified only lask week and that too with hundreds of riders. It is certain that there is only augmentation rather than reduction in nuclear weapons and warheads possessed. Yet another item is Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972. It barred both Russia and USA not to build any anti-missile defence weapons or systems. This treaty too stands killed in that America has unilaterally announced building of such defence system for which 50 billion dollars have been allocated. Ms Albright while speaking to ongoing NPT conference justifies it due to threat of missile attacks from ‘rogue States’. These rogue States are however undefined. FMCT (Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty) likewise has not made any headway. This relates to ban on export of fissile material/technologies by the haves to the have-nots. China has openly violated spirit of FMCT by exporting such material and technology to Pakistan. It is certain that those who initiated NPT and made 187 countries to sign it are the greatest proliferators of NPT itself led by USA and closely followed by China. This strengthens India's case as regards not signing of CTBT and NPT besides giving the country nuclear deterrent. |
||
|
||
Daunting
challenges for the president - elect of Russia Vladimir Putin might be best described as a KGB democrat, with all the contradictions that the term implies. Putin is a hybrid politician, the product of the recent transformation of Russia from a totalitarian state to a shaky democracy. Like his country, he seems suspended between Russia's history and its future, impressed by the benefits of liberty and free markets yet drawn to the idea of a firm leader who can restore stability. There is little doubt that he will be a forceful President, determined to reverse Russia's decline. The question is whether he will do so democratically. Putin's rise to power has been meteoric. He is for all practical purposes the spy who came in from the cold. In August last year, President Boris Yeltsin realised that Prime Minister Sergei Stepashin would probably not win a presidential election. It is then that Yeltsin decided to replace Stepashin with Putin. It was Yeltsin's belief that Putin was the man most capable of winning an election and preventing the Communists from capturing power. So when Yeltsin resigned on New Year's eve, three months ahead of schedule, it was quite obvious who the ostensible successor was. Besides the fact that Putin has been an active spy for the KGB, the world at large had very little idea of who he was. Three months and an election later, the world still knows as much about him. And now that as President of Russia, Putin has enormous powers at his command, the world is not clear about what he intends to do with these powers. In fact, Russians too lack any real idea of who this man is or what his plans for the future are. In his three months as acting President, Putin has not undertaken any major step to improve the lot of the Russians. As a matter of fact, he has not shown a decisive commitment to political and economic reform. His only decisive action has been the offensive against Chechnya. It is quite evident that the central aims of this offensive were to avenge Russia's military defeat in 1996 and to lift the political fortunes of Vladimir Putin. It is Putin's ability to avenge the humiliation of the 1994-96 defeat that despite later disenchantment, it ensured Putin a sure win in the elections held 26 March. People believe that Putin is a "man who gets down to work in earnest, a man who will be able to establish order and discipline and speed up economic development". A reason for his appeal is his KGB past: the KGB used to enroll "the cream of the cream" of the Soviet youth. That alone would put him head and shoulders above the other leaders. The people of Russia trust Putin, for here is a leader, who was part of the Soviet apparatus and yet not part of the Communist Party. The Russians are fed up of a decade of disorder, chaos and anarchy that has marked the Gorbachev and Yeltsin era. They want a strongman who can rule them, someone who can restore the sense of security by ending endemic crime and corruption. It is as Dimitry Oreshkin, chief analyst of the Central Election Commission says, "There is a popular longing for a person who would come and satisfy everyone. This has happened before, and it's taking place now". There is much to be done to fix matters in Russia. The economy is in the doldrums, The Commerce is controlled and manipulated by criminal gangs. These local governors and tycoons known as oligarchs are the main obstacles to Putin's plans for what he calls "effective state" which guarantees the "dictatorship of the law". Interestingly, Putin would face the biggest challenge in this context in his hometown of St. Petersburg: the city with the most problems of contract killing and corruption. The expectations are great. Some powerful business men like Peter Aven, head of Alfabank hope that Putin will grow into a strong leader in the Pinochet mould, capable of using force to buttress the market economy. As regards Russia's relations with the West, the by word would be to wait and watch. Considering the proportions of Russia's internal problems, Putin would be wise to concentrate on not getting into a confrontational relation with the West, as a confrontational relationship will scare off investors that Russia needs. It would also make it difficult to access loans from the International Monetary Fund. There is a great deal of expectation from the new Russian president. Many of his supporters want different things from the new president; few have much idea what he stands for as there is widespread suspicion that he has only a vague notion of how he intends to pursue reforms. A clear picture of Putin's plans will emerge only after his inauguration and the appointment of a new government in May. Putin could advance reform while protecting the newly won liberties of the Russians.... He could make government a compassionate, effective and honest weapon of change. Putin could in effect convert into reality the expectations and hopes which the Russian people harboured with the end of Communism. But will he do so? His three months as acting President show that he is prone to taking a harsher route to achieve his objectives. Political analysts feel that, "the so-called democratisation of Russia in the last ten years was to a great extent the weakening of the state. And now, as the strengthening of the state is going on and Putin is representing this trend, it's almost understandable that a lot of so-called democratic achievements will be lost" For his part Putin has always said that he is a democrat first and a nice guy second _ and that ensuring democracy means assembling a government strong enough to arrest financial and social decline. As if to warn the Russian people of the tough times ahead Putin says that "the level of expectation is very high _ people are tired and struggling and they are hoping for things to get better, but miracles don't happen". But he is quick to reassure the people that democracy is here to stay and that he is not a "closet authoritarian". Putin said that the Russian dictatorship has been relegated to history's ash heap and that those who warn most of its resurgence may be fixated on the concept themselves. Putin has been described as a KGB democrat. He embodies the contradiction that the term implies. A hybrid politician, who is the product of the recent transformation of Russia from a communist state to a nascent democracy. His unfamiliarity with he democratic processes is reflected in his reaction to the recent elections. "Even in my worst nightmare I could not have dreamt that I could take part in an election. It seems an activity devoid of conscience. You have to promise something the whole time and you have to promise more than your competitor." Whether Putin is the answer to the Russian prayers for stability is something only time will tell. And time alone will tell whether he is Russia's real hope, entrusted with the task of reinventing Russia or he was just the man at the right place and the right time. INAV |
||
|
|
The law does catch up Laloo Prasad Yadav's arrest in the disproportionate assets case and grant of bail to his wife and the chief minister of Bihar, Rabri Devi, is bound to be viewed from two standpoints. Legally, one cannot fault the arrest. Those who abused their office to acquire vast assets disproportionate to their known sources of income cannot expect the law to act coy just because they are powerful political leaders who still wield the lever of state power. The arrest is part of the process of the trial to follow which will decide whether the charges have substance or not. On that count, no tears need be shed for the former chief minister and the Rastriya Janata Dal chief, Mr. Laloo Prasad Yadav. But given the highly polarised nature of the polity in Bihar, an objective view of the arrest is unlikely to be taken. Mr. Laloo Yadav's camp followers, whose numbers are not insignificant, are bound to cry foul. This is because the opposition National Democratic Alliance has committed the indiscretion of being seen as too much in a hurry to rule Bihar. The moral argument against allowing Mrs. Rabri Devi in the chief executive's saddle _ now that she stands accused of aiding and abetting Mr. Laloo Prasad Yadav in acquiring assets disproportionate to their known sources of income _ thus sounds more than a little convenient. Unfortunately, the fact also remains that very few political leaders, not just in Bihar but also in the entire country, are in a position to cast the first stone. Such is the stuff of which popular perceptions about politicians are made. And there is more than a grain of truth in this perception. For, if truth be told, there will be few politicians who can place their hands on their heart and swear that they have not followed in the same path for which Laloo Prasad Yadav is being arraigned today. Therein lies the moral dilemma of the political system in the country. Ideally, a Laloo Prasad Yadav and a Rabri Devi being hauled before the court come forth as a triumph of the law and, by implication, as an endorsement of the health of the political system. That partisanship has made such a perception impossible tells the story of the depths to which the political system has fallen in popular perception. Undoubtedly, the law must take its own course and those who subverted it must not be allowed to be shielded under any consideration. But then selective prosecution does not promote faith in the majesty of the law or the ability of of the system to unhold it without fear and favour. Nevertood of the country to call errant politicians to task. It was with the support of the Congress Party that the coalition government was formed. But the crass manner in which 22 of the 23 MLAs (one had already been elected Speaker) of the Congress party were absorbed into the cabinet, is quite reminiscent of the way the defectors from the Congress and BSP gratified with ministerial loaves and fishes in UP in 1997, leaves one considerably bemused. It is now a universally acknowledged fact that during the last decade of the rule of Laloo Prasad Yadav and the RJD, Bihar has touched the abyss in terms of poverty and underdevelopment. Not that the state was highly advanced before Laloo Yadav came to power in 1990. But the difference between what happened in the last ten years and earlier is that power and the associated pelf in the 1990s had come to be controlled by a particular group, the Yadavs, which saw Laloo Prasad Yadav as its compatriot. The politicians of Bihar, irrespective of political parties, must refashion their politics as well as their ways of political manoeuvring to turn the state around, instead of remaining a prisoner of time-worn practices. Even though it might sound quaint given the level of political immorality prevailing in the country, it should still be stressed that representatives of people are, in the main, their servants. The way the MLAs of Bihar have behaved to secure offices and the manner in which parties have stood up for them, does not bear out the dictum. The sufferers shall be the people of Bihar who shall have to carry the jumbo cabinet along. The Bihar episode is reflective of unprincipled politics of the Congress Party and indications are that it is all set to plumb new depths. The Congress's decision to join the RJD -led Government caps a series of policy somersaults in the State. Only last year, after a massacre in the State, the Congress president visited the site of the carnage and passionately questioned the Rabri Government's moral authority to rule. Almost immediately after, her party did a volte face _ it opposed the imposition of President's Rule in the State by the NDA Government. Next, suddenly rediscovering the virtues of the Pachmarhi declaration, the party decided to go it alone in the Assembly polls. Having fought the polls on an aggressively anti-Laloo platform, came the party's decision to prop up, and even participate in the Rabri Devi Government. This despite the fact that past experience had shown that playing second fiddle to Mr. Laloo Yadav was riddled with clear and present dangers: It may cause a split in its Bihar unit in the short term; it is bound to destroy all chances of its revival in the State in the long run. Quite obviously, when it comes to Bihar and Mr. Laloo Prasad Yadav, the Congress remembers nothing, and learns even less. The story of the selection of its Rajya Sabha nominees makes for equally dismal reading. For reasons unknown, a host of complete political nobodys were nominated even as veterans who had served the party for years were denied RS berths. With even senior leaders reportedly clueless about the identity of several candidates, the situation was a farcical one. Obviously, despite all the talk of criteria and rules, the factor that finally dictated the inclusions, as well as the notable exclusions, was loyalty to the High Command and subservience to her diktat. In the end, the selection of candidates was a private affair between the aspirants and Ms. Sonia Gandhi. It mattered little that the "rule" (violated by Ms. Sonia Gandhi herself in the case of Dr. Karan Singh) _ that those defeated in Lok Sabha must not be nominated for the Upper House _ was observed, nor any criteria of representativeness. It is a sad statement on a party that has enjoyed long decades in power that it should hasten to tail Mr. Laloo Prasad Yadav for the spoils of office. It speaks volumes for the organisation's discrepair that much defeated leaders like Mr. Arjun Singh should merit a "special" status in the hierarchy _- Mr. Singh filed his nomination papers for the Rajya Sabha well ahead of other Congress candidates. The Congress has pressed the self-destruct button. Nobody can save it from itself. As far Bihar goes the Congress Party is doomed along with the RJD. INAV |
|
Price of profligacy Unanimity amongst parliamen tarians is rare. One of the few issues that bind them together relates to an enhancement of their pay and perks. Rare scenes of across-the-board jubilation are witnessed when the emoluments of the MPs are revised by a voice vote in the Lok Sabha. These revisions have become more frequent and invariably linked to the rate of inflation. Not counting their blessings of free accommodation in the best of localities, fixed salary and the office maintenance allowance, the elected representatives of the people also get Rs. 2 crores per head for the local area development programme (MPLAD). The outlay under the scheme works out to be Rs. 1500 crores annually. The scheme was introduced in 1993 during Narasimha Rao's minority government as a bonanza to keep the parliamentarians happy. The finance ministry and the Planning Commission were unhappy over the decision and succeeded in stalling it for more than two years. The scheme came into effect in 1995 with each member getting Rs. one crore for the development of his constituency. With the onset of the coalition politics and the government's growing need to keep the MPs happy resulted in the doubling of the allocation to Rs. 2 crores in 1997. The ever demanding MPs are now insisting that the amount be doubled to Rs. 4 crores per head. The economic implications of the demand are serious. The finance minister, Yashwant Sinha, will have to cough up Rs. 3100 crores in the current year against the budgetary allocation of Rs. 1500 crores for the year. Sinha will find himself in a financial spot if he bows to the demand. Already he has been saddled with an additional burden of Rs. 1000 crores as a result of one percentage point increase in the dearness and pension fund announced recently. He will have to provide additional Rs. 2500 crores outside the budget for the year 2000-2001. Going back to the origin of the scheme, its primary objective was to involve the MPs in their local area development programme. They were expected to discuss their programmes with the local bodies and attempt to get their schemes with the ongoing/ new schemes aimed at the development of rural social infrastructure. The MPs were expected to surrender their share to the approved schemes in the areas of health, family planning, village roads and education. The funds were to be routed through the district magistrate and disbursed in two equal six monthly instalments. The ministry for planning and programme implementation was asked to monitor and keep a tab over the progress of such schemes and ensure that the funds were not misused. Two general elections in as many years diverted the focus of the schemes. The reality is that the MPs did not get enough time to either suggest the schemes or see through their implementation. Some schemes were even left halfway through for the want of funds and a follow up action. Interestingly, the newly elected members suggested their own schemes instead of completion of the ongoing schemes initiated by their predecessors. With the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) enjoying majority in the 13th Lok Sabha, the MPs have a renewed interest in the scheme. They have also started pressurising the government for enhancing the MPs kitty to Rs. 3100 crores from the current year itself. The matter has generated an interesting debate within the government. While the ministry for parliamentary affairs is fully backing the demand, Arun Shourie, the minister-in-charge of MPLAD has opposed it vehemently. He has asked the Prime Minister's Office and Comptroller and Auditor General of India to audit certain ongoing scheme through random samples. Shourie is believed to have pointed out to the PMO that the scheme should be reviewed before taking any decision on increasing the allowance under the scheme. A latest review by the ministry of planning and programme implementation has shown that Rs. 1600 crores remain unutilised under the scheme. Since 1995 when the scheme was activated only Rs. 3000 crores have been spent. In a confidential note to the PMO several irregularities by the MPs, too, have been brought to its notice, which would eventually be examined by the CAG. Though Shourie has stopped at that one can extend the ambit of the debate by challenging the very concept of providing a separate fund for the MPs. Even the father of the scheme, Narasimha Rao, could not defend the scheme on economic grounds. One explanation could be that the Election Commission did not want the parties to raise funds from the industry to fight elections. As the government could not create a fund for electioneering, it was suggested that let each MP identify problems of his local areas and join his might with the planners in solving some of the serious problems relating to roads, health and education. After all, a long-term investment as well as sustained political interest in the constituency could help the parties build a political base. It would also reduce the need for contributions for elections. Involvement also meant a check on the implementing authorities. The objectives remained a pipe dream with all involved attempting to make a quick buck. The situation today is that MPs do not like any auditing and their interest areas are limited to granting contracts to their people who grease their palms. As usual, the interests of the poor, rural folk have been put on the shelf. As the scheme has failed to achieve its objective there is full justification of scrapping it, what to talk of doubling the entitlement. The Planning Commission and the rural development ministry were always against the scheme. As it is, there is a multiplicity of rural development schemes which impede their implementation. On the other hand, injecting political element will perhaps sound their death knell. Besides, seeking the consent of an MP in the selection of an area's development plan indirectly undermines he authority of the panchayat and curbs its freedom. It sounds especially jarring when there is so much of talk of decentralisation of planning and its implementation through the gram sabhas. One sincerely hopes that Shourie's objection to the enhancement of the MPLAD allowance is examined along with the proper audit of the ongoing MP projects. The scrutiny itself would deter the government to concede to the demand. Besides, the finance minister, too, would put in a word and bring the high fiscal deficit in the current fiscal year to the notice of the Cabinet. The right course, therefore, would be to sleep over the demand till such time that the Cabinet decides on Shourie's note. The matter will die a natural death if the Cabinet decides to ask the CAG to look into certain cases involving irregularities. Whatever be the Cabinet decision, the demand if conceded would mean further pampering the MPs and putting a hole to the exchequer. INAV |
|
|
|
