I have been listening to the discussion in Loksabha. Every member come with a characterstic feature. Few of them are to be noted. few are very distinct
i did not hear Pranab Mukharjee but it seems he said some sentnce about praying to Indra for good rain. this has been used by many speaker to say that he is wrong. MM Joshi reminded of Govardhan dhari Krishna to protect from Indra. then he went a bit further in a style of which only BJP can do. He included names of many God in speech. It looks like Mr Mukharjee
Yound MP of Gonda from Jharkhand delivered speech which was mix of scholastic and spontaneous. Lalji tandan also started very well. one good thing to learn from him is that it is nice to quote some great people of past and if possible couplet is to be preferred. He started with saving cow campaign and he was fluent after that he had to resort to paper.
Supriya phule of NCP was precise and in time. Usually people never take care of time.
Baba Ram Dev has also featured many times in parliament. His name was used manly by BJP people in context with black money.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Thursday, February 24, 2011
New Term - Patronage Democracy
This is a news article which was published in The Hindu. Emphasis are my own and comments are in italics
In a patronage democracy (that was the new terminology used to cloud facts) where resource distribution depends on the discretion of elected officials, it pays to stay close to the power centres in government.
Ahmadbhai Shaikh is a muezzin in a mosque in the Behrampura area of Ahmedabad. If not reciting the ‘azaan,' he is busy helping Bharatiya Janata Party workers in his ward to campaign among members of his community. His reason for shifting from the Congress to the BJP is “the hope that our drainage problems will be solved, after all these years.” As one who was lucky to escape the arson and looting in the city in 2002, he merely calls that a “period of misfortune.”
It was nine years ago that Gujarat's biggest wave of Hindu-Muslim violence was triggered in Godhra. The burning of the Sabarmati Express marked the beginning of an anti-Muslim backlash that continued intermittently for the entire year amid allegations of State complicity. That period reinforced existing residential and symbolic segregation of Muslims in cities like Ahmedabad.
Nine years later, the victims of the violence are embracing their perceived perpetrators.
As has been already discussed extensively, Gujarat's Muslims voting for the BJP is an exceptional case compared to, say, Bihar where the BJP was accepted only on the condition of excluding Hindutva (and Narendra Modi), or even other parts of northern India where Sikhs voted for their perceived oppressors, the Congress, only after a public apology the party made to the community. The reasons for the transformation behind the new ‘all-inclusive' BJP have also been discussed widely.
Yet, what is far more exceptional is the kind of Muslims supporting the BJP in Gujarat.
Take Ahmedabad city, for example. The campaign trail of the BJP in the 2010 civic polls here included a patchwork of busybody Muslim clerics and traders: two groups that we would assume to have different voting preferences. The traders have an understandable, rational logic of voting for a party that has emphasised its economic development policies as never before. The voting preference of two significant trader-Muslim communities of Gujarat, the Dawoodi Bohras and the Khojas — both Shias — has always tended to be biased towards the party in power, be it the British in pre-independent India, the Congress in the 1980s to early-1990s, or the BJP later. “The Syedna or the head priest will always seek a cordial relationship with those in power. It is in his interests, and as he sees it, in the interests of the community,” says scholar-activist J.S. Bandukwala.
However, if one looks at the situation five years ago, it is fascinating and almost implausible why religious Sunni Muslims, including clerics, would come out to support the BJP.
In 2006, this writer spoke with Asma Saiyed, a student at St. Xavier's College in Ahmedabad. Enraged by the events of 2002, she had taken a significant decision: to add the burqa to her wardrobe of western wear. For this eloquent young woman, wearing her religion on her sleeve was a “slap in the face” of the BJP, which she viewed as the architect of violence against Muslims in 2002. (Those who wishes to give slap in face of BJP are constantly slapped when they see their fellow men joining BJP) “All of us friends felt cowed down by a constant anti-Muslim rhetoric since 2002. And we thought whether it made any sense to be scared. We said, okay so you want to hate us? Here are our burqas so we know that you know we are Muslims. Now come, get us.”
Ms Saiyed belonged to that section of Muslims who developed a collective identity in opposition to the majority, most of whom, they believed, endorsed the BJP's Hindutva rhetoric. This was similar to what John Ogbu's work on ‘oppositional culture' among Black American students in the U.S. tells us — that their identities as minorities were developed as a response to White racism, which then led them to oppose conformism in education and all that which would be “good” (White or majority) behaviour.
Religious symbolism became a shield for these Muslims to protect their identities against the threat of rising, rabid Hindutva. Compromise seemed impossible even in the exchange of economic development. So when Congress workers told this writer recently that Muslims were paid by the BJP to support it in the civic elections, it was paradoxical, even if the claim were true. People generally refuse to involve themselves in cost-benefit calculations and reach a self-serving decision on issues of a sacred nature when given material incentives in exchange. ( what was sacred doing in secular world?) Assuming some Muslims did accept money from the BJP in exchange of support, does it mean they are no longer looking at the 2002 post-Godhra violence as an attack on their religious identity? If the Congress is not a favourable alternative and the BJP a lurking ethnic threat, why vote at all?
The answer perhaps lies in the fact that India's is a patronage democracy wherein resource distribution depends on the discretion of elected officials as a form of market good rather than an entitlement. Staying close to the power centres in government is the key to survival. For the traders, survival is synonymous with their occupation. For the cleric, it could mean assimilation to avoid being labelled anything from anti-social to anti-national — no surprise that most Muslim BJP supporters, including religious Muslims, have patriotic songs as their phone caller tune.
“This terrorism taint is too much for the community. As long as the BJP is in power, we have to be part of the mainstream to shun this tag,” says Imranbhai, a fruit vendor in Ahmedabad. He fits the stereotype of the Congress supporter: white kurta-pyjama, skull cap, untrimmed beard and moustache. Only that he swears by the BJP. “There is no shame for a Muslim today to admit he supports the BJP,” he says. Indeed, the indifference of religious Muslims to saffron flags fluttering in the dense Muslim ghettos of Juhapura and Saudagar ni Pol in Ahmedabad — areas that are alien to the local Hindu except in scary stories — was unthinkable earlier.
Moin Khan, once a CPI(M) worker, soon to sign up with the BJP, explains that the power centre for a religious Muslim is the local cleric; for the cleric, it is the people in governance. “The maulvis can mobilise masses because people listen to them. For the maulvis to establish credibility among the people, they have no choice but to get their hands dirtied in their network of influential politicians.” He recalls how a Sunni Muslim cleric who was close to the BJP helped trace a local slum-dweller's daughter who had disappeared. “Some clerics help the Congress, many now [help] the BJP because there is no alternative.”
Moving back again five years ago, as one section of Muslims in Ahmedabad battled issues of identity using religion as a shield, another section had begun to develop a different kind of collective solutions to the discrimination. They were of the view that survival was possible only for the fittest Muslim — one who conforms to the mainstream majority. Prepping up for an existence war of sorts, they began to set up schools and focus on mainstream education for their children. Almost 70 per cent of Muslim-managed educational institutions, for example, were established in Ahmedabad between 1993 and 2005 — after the two waves of Hindu-Muslim violence.
Qutbuddin Ansari, who became the “face of the Gujarat riots,” his pleading picture making news in national and international media in 2002, refused an interview with this writer in 2007. His request: privacy. “I've moved on. Please let me be.”
The movement to “move on” had already started. The recent civic elections took it to a higher level.
Remember that this remains a discussion about a very small section of Muslims — most of whom relatively (that is, not directly) affected by the violence (So Muslims who support BJP will loose to be part of the mainstream muslim). Moreover, political attitudes in a civic election are based on ground issues. Slum-dwellers in the old city of Ahmedabad are ready to switch left, right and centre (the CPI (M) to the RSS to the BJP) as long as they get their local corporator to provide their daily quota of drinking water. Whether the BJP will continue to embrace Muslims at the cost of upsetting its majority target voters in Gujarat in the Assembly elections, will be seen in the future. (to say either or or is not nature of politics. Politics likes in looking for a new way)
“The BJP will always be anti-Muslim, that is its identity. But the benefits it has given to Hindus, say in the Sarkhej ward, have indirectly reached Muslims,” says Shahid Ali, a Muslim entrepreneur. A Congress supporter, he is open to the BJP if it continues to welcome Muslim candidates. Speaking of former top cop Al Saiyed, who contested on the BJP ticket, he says, “I would not mind having a Muslim candidate like Saiyed. At least I have someone of my own to hold accountable for any sloppy work.” (that shows that the person is not willing to integrate) Mr. Saiyed, who managed to get over 13,000 votes in Sarkhej, himself believes that the recent change in political behaviour is driven by educated Muslims and those who have realised the need to be in the mainstream. “If we do not assimilate with other communities, it's the end of us!” he says.
(Raheel Dhattiwala is a doctoral researcher in the Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, who is doing field work in Ahmedabad.)
In a patronage democracy (that was the new terminology used to cloud facts) where resource distribution depends on the discretion of elected officials, it pays to stay close to the power centres in government.
Ahmadbhai Shaikh is a muezzin in a mosque in the Behrampura area of Ahmedabad. If not reciting the ‘azaan,' he is busy helping Bharatiya Janata Party workers in his ward to campaign among members of his community. His reason for shifting from the Congress to the BJP is “the hope that our drainage problems will be solved, after all these years.” As one who was lucky to escape the arson and looting in the city in 2002, he merely calls that a “period of misfortune.”
It was nine years ago that Gujarat's biggest wave of Hindu-Muslim violence was triggered in Godhra. The burning of the Sabarmati Express marked the beginning of an anti-Muslim backlash that continued intermittently for the entire year amid allegations of State complicity. That period reinforced existing residential and symbolic segregation of Muslims in cities like Ahmedabad.
Nine years later, the victims of the violence are embracing their perceived perpetrators.
As has been already discussed extensively, Gujarat's Muslims voting for the BJP is an exceptional case compared to, say, Bihar where the BJP was accepted only on the condition of excluding Hindutva (and Narendra Modi), or even other parts of northern India where Sikhs voted for their perceived oppressors, the Congress, only after a public apology the party made to the community. The reasons for the transformation behind the new ‘all-inclusive' BJP have also been discussed widely.
Yet, what is far more exceptional is the kind of Muslims supporting the BJP in Gujarat.
Take Ahmedabad city, for example. The campaign trail of the BJP in the 2010 civic polls here included a patchwork of busybody Muslim clerics and traders: two groups that we would assume to have different voting preferences. The traders have an understandable, rational logic of voting for a party that has emphasised its economic development policies as never before. The voting preference of two significant trader-Muslim communities of Gujarat, the Dawoodi Bohras and the Khojas — both Shias — has always tended to be biased towards the party in power, be it the British in pre-independent India, the Congress in the 1980s to early-1990s, or the BJP later. “The Syedna or the head priest will always seek a cordial relationship with those in power. It is in his interests, and as he sees it, in the interests of the community,” says scholar-activist J.S. Bandukwala.
However, if one looks at the situation five years ago, it is fascinating and almost implausible why religious Sunni Muslims, including clerics, would come out to support the BJP.
In 2006, this writer spoke with Asma Saiyed, a student at St. Xavier's College in Ahmedabad. Enraged by the events of 2002, she had taken a significant decision: to add the burqa to her wardrobe of western wear. For this eloquent young woman, wearing her religion on her sleeve was a “slap in the face” of the BJP, which she viewed as the architect of violence against Muslims in 2002. (Those who wishes to give slap in face of BJP are constantly slapped when they see their fellow men joining BJP) “All of us friends felt cowed down by a constant anti-Muslim rhetoric since 2002. And we thought whether it made any sense to be scared. We said, okay so you want to hate us? Here are our burqas so we know that you know we are Muslims. Now come, get us.”
Ms Saiyed belonged to that section of Muslims who developed a collective identity in opposition to the majority, most of whom, they believed, endorsed the BJP's Hindutva rhetoric. This was similar to what John Ogbu's work on ‘oppositional culture' among Black American students in the U.S. tells us — that their identities as minorities were developed as a response to White racism, which then led them to oppose conformism in education and all that which would be “good” (White or majority) behaviour.
Religious symbolism became a shield for these Muslims to protect their identities against the threat of rising, rabid Hindutva. Compromise seemed impossible even in the exchange of economic development. So when Congress workers told this writer recently that Muslims were paid by the BJP to support it in the civic elections, it was paradoxical, even if the claim were true. People generally refuse to involve themselves in cost-benefit calculations and reach a self-serving decision on issues of a sacred nature when given material incentives in exchange. ( what was sacred doing in secular world?) Assuming some Muslims did accept money from the BJP in exchange of support, does it mean they are no longer looking at the 2002 post-Godhra violence as an attack on their religious identity? If the Congress is not a favourable alternative and the BJP a lurking ethnic threat, why vote at all?
The answer perhaps lies in the fact that India's is a patronage democracy wherein resource distribution depends on the discretion of elected officials as a form of market good rather than an entitlement. Staying close to the power centres in government is the key to survival. For the traders, survival is synonymous with their occupation. For the cleric, it could mean assimilation to avoid being labelled anything from anti-social to anti-national — no surprise that most Muslim BJP supporters, including religious Muslims, have patriotic songs as their phone caller tune.
“This terrorism taint is too much for the community. As long as the BJP is in power, we have to be part of the mainstream to shun this tag,” says Imranbhai, a fruit vendor in Ahmedabad. He fits the stereotype of the Congress supporter: white kurta-pyjama, skull cap, untrimmed beard and moustache. Only that he swears by the BJP. “There is no shame for a Muslim today to admit he supports the BJP,” he says. Indeed, the indifference of religious Muslims to saffron flags fluttering in the dense Muslim ghettos of Juhapura and Saudagar ni Pol in Ahmedabad — areas that are alien to the local Hindu except in scary stories — was unthinkable earlier.
Moin Khan, once a CPI(M) worker, soon to sign up with the BJP, explains that the power centre for a religious Muslim is the local cleric; for the cleric, it is the people in governance. “The maulvis can mobilise masses because people listen to them. For the maulvis to establish credibility among the people, they have no choice but to get their hands dirtied in their network of influential politicians.” He recalls how a Sunni Muslim cleric who was close to the BJP helped trace a local slum-dweller's daughter who had disappeared. “Some clerics help the Congress, many now [help] the BJP because there is no alternative.”
Moving back again five years ago, as one section of Muslims in Ahmedabad battled issues of identity using religion as a shield, another section had begun to develop a different kind of collective solutions to the discrimination. They were of the view that survival was possible only for the fittest Muslim — one who conforms to the mainstream majority. Prepping up for an existence war of sorts, they began to set up schools and focus on mainstream education for their children. Almost 70 per cent of Muslim-managed educational institutions, for example, were established in Ahmedabad between 1993 and 2005 — after the two waves of Hindu-Muslim violence.
Qutbuddin Ansari, who became the “face of the Gujarat riots,” his pleading picture making news in national and international media in 2002, refused an interview with this writer in 2007. His request: privacy. “I've moved on. Please let me be.”
The movement to “move on” had already started. The recent civic elections took it to a higher level.
Remember that this remains a discussion about a very small section of Muslims — most of whom relatively (that is, not directly) affected by the violence (So Muslims who support BJP will loose to be part of the mainstream muslim). Moreover, political attitudes in a civic election are based on ground issues. Slum-dwellers in the old city of Ahmedabad are ready to switch left, right and centre (the CPI (M) to the RSS to the BJP) as long as they get their local corporator to provide their daily quota of drinking water. Whether the BJP will continue to embrace Muslims at the cost of upsetting its majority target voters in Gujarat in the Assembly elections, will be seen in the future. (to say either or or is not nature of politics. Politics likes in looking for a new way)
“The BJP will always be anti-Muslim, that is its identity. But the benefits it has given to Hindus, say in the Sarkhej ward, have indirectly reached Muslims,” says Shahid Ali, a Muslim entrepreneur. A Congress supporter, he is open to the BJP if it continues to welcome Muslim candidates. Speaking of former top cop Al Saiyed, who contested on the BJP ticket, he says, “I would not mind having a Muslim candidate like Saiyed. At least I have someone of my own to hold accountable for any sloppy work.” (that shows that the person is not willing to integrate) Mr. Saiyed, who managed to get over 13,000 votes in Sarkhej, himself believes that the recent change in political behaviour is driven by educated Muslims and those who have realised the need to be in the mainstream. “If we do not assimilate with other communities, it's the end of us!” he says.
(Raheel Dhattiwala is a doctoral researcher in the Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, who is doing field work in Ahmedabad.)
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Press meet of PM-from The Hindu
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's interaction with Editors of the Electronic Media on Feb.16, 2011
February 16, 2011
New Delhi
Preliminary transcript
PM’s opening remarks
It is real pleasure meeting you on this auspicious occasion when we are all celebrating the birthday of Hazrat Mohammad Shah . Today is Eid and on this occasion I would like to felicitate all our country men and women and extend my greetings. May this Eid bring, added peace and prosperity to the people of India.
During the last couple of months, the media have drawn the country’s attention to some aberrations whether in the form of allocation of 2G spectrum, the Commonwealth Games and more recently some developments in the Space organization, Adarsh society affairs. I think media have played a very important role in drawing the country’s attention to these issues which require corrective action. I wish to assure you and I wish to assure the country as a whole that our Government is dead serious in bringing to book all the wrong doers, regardless of the position they may occupy. However I would like to say that in projecting these events an impression has gone round (and PM does not care for the impression) that we are a scam-driven country and that nothing good is happening in our country. In the process, believingly, I think we are weakening the self-confidence of the people of India (Really!! or it is about self confidence of government). I don’t that it is in the interest of anybody in our country. We have a functioning government, and whatever some people may say that we are a lame duck government that I am a lame duck prime minister, we take our job very seriously, we are here to govern and to govern effectively, tackle the problems as they arise and get this country moving forward on a pace of development which would do justice to the demands being made on the process of governance.
I wish to tell you that our economy is in good shape ( Indicators of health of economy should be revisited). We will have a growth rate of 8.5 percent this fiscal year and that the way India has come out and tackled the aftermath of international financial crisis, I think does our country a great credit. It is certainly true that in recent months inflation and food inflation in particular has been a problem. We want to deal it in a manner that the growth rhythm is not disturbed. If we were concerned with only curbing inflation I think we could have done it by pursuing tighter monetary policies, we could have brought about a situation where price rise could be moderated. But if in the process, growth process gets hurt I think that would not do our country any good and we are trying to deal with inflation at a time when we don’t have all instruments at our command in the sense that we do not have control over international events. We are now increasingly an open economy and the oil prices are rising, the food prices are rising, commodity prices are rising, we have to deal with inflation despite an adverse international environment and you have my assurance that we will succeed. And at the end of the fiscal year, the inflation rate should come down to no more than 7 percent (These words will be reevaluated).
Also I would like to mention that internal security of the country has been a great concern. I wouldn’t like to say that we are not worried about terrorist acts. We are better prepared to deal with acts of terror and prevent many potential terrorist acts and I think the Government deserves some credit. In the North East, things are getting normalized. Talks are going to begin with ULFA and the ULFA leadership (The real Ulfa is still out) having decided to give up the path up violence is a welcome development which will have far reaching consequences for the growth process in our North Eastern States.
In same way, in J&K, after some turbulence there are I think signs we are getting the situation under control and that the people of J&K can look forward to orderly development of development processes. A number of committees are working to chart out that path and Dr. Rangarajan is preparing a report on the employment aspects, and if that report is implemented, it would bring a fresh ray of hope to young people in J&K who are eagerly searching for productive employment opportunities (surprisingly employment is not their demand).
As far as the external situation is concerned, I think this fiscal year, all the top leaders of the five permanent members of Security Council have visited our country. This has never happened before and the world today appreciates that India is a democracy, a functioning democracy, committed to the rule of law, committed to respect of fundamental human rights, is trying to seek its economic and social salvation in the framework of democracy and rapidly expanding the economy too. Wherever I go, people marvel that there is a country like India, a country of a billion people, a functioning democracy, committed to the rule of law, committed to respect for all fundamental human freedoms and yet managing to grow at the rate of 8-9% per annum (is committing to law and growth contradictory aspects). People marvel that this can be done and whatever our own domestic weaknesses I think, we should not create an atmosphere whereby the nation loses its sense of self confidence.
The media has an obligation, the Government has an obligation, the Opposition has an obligation that we work together in a spirit that India as a whole has to march forward. Parliament has not been allowed to function for reasons which I am not able to understand (When whole country understand and PM does not understand then PM should check his understanding). But we are making an honest effort to ensure that the next session of parliament will be an orderly session. We have important legislations apart from the budget to put before parliament and talks are going on with the opposition parties to ensure that whatever our differences, parliament should be allowed to function normally.
So I would wish to mention to you that in reporting the affairs of our nation, we mustn’t focus excessively on the negative features important though it is that the government should deal with them, to take effective action and you have my assurance that wherever such corrective action is required, our government will take that action and will bring the wrong doers to book. With these words, I once again welcome you to this session of interaction. The Media has, as I said, a very important role to play in a functioning democracy that India is and let us work together to revitalize the spirit of rejuvenation, spirit of self confidence that we have problems, but we also have credible mechanisms to overcome them. We shall overcome, we shall prevail. We will provide our country a functioning effective government and that’s what I wanted to say in the very beginning now the floor is entirely yours.
Question and Answer session.
Q.1 Aaj Tak Arun Purie : Mr. Prime Minister, thank you for inviting us for the interaction. I hope you have more of them (with a hind sight it can be told that it better that he does not appear again). I am sorry to take you back to the 2G scam although you have said that it should not be a scam oriented coverage and you have taken some very positive steps and as you have just assured us that you will get the wrong doers of the 2G scam. Just for my better understanding of how we got into this situation, you had warned Mr. Raja in November 2007 to consider ing auction of the 2G spectrum at 2007 rates and he actually disregarded your advice. And later on in 2008 the companies which got the spectrum sold it for large sums of money, the values which are in the public domain. Inspite of all this you appointed him again as the Telecom Minister. What was your thinking behind this?
Ans PM: Let me first deal with what I said to Mr. Raja in a letter that I wrote to him on 2nd of November 2007. I mentioned in that letter number of concerns which were being expressed, some in the press, some telecom companies used to come and mention to me. I listed a number of issues and I said to him that you must look into these issues and ensure that they are dealt with in a fair, equitable and transparent manner. One of the issues that I asked him to look into was the possibility from legal and technical angle of having an auction of spectrum. Mr. Raja wrote back to me almost on the same day, or our letters crossed (even that not sure). He said, I have been absolutely transparent in my dealings, I will be so in the future, and you have my assurance that I have done nothing and will do nothing which will not be consistent with the promise that I am making.
Now as far as auction is concerned, he came back to me and said (Did he stop you from checking it) auction is something which has not been suggested by TRAI, also not suggested by the Telecom Commission and he also said that if we have an auction, it would not give a level playing field for the new comers, because the existing players have got their spectrum free of charge of about 10 megahertz. Therefore he said the TRAI’s advice, Telecom Commission’s advice and his own view was that auctions are not the way forward at least for 2G spectrum and he also mentioned in a subsequent letter that he is agreeable to auction of 3G spectrum. But with regard to 2G spectrum, he was very clear that he should stay with the then existing approach (Raja was clear and Maharaja was not).
And this was also discussed with the Finance Ministry because in terms of the Cabinet decision of 2003 the pricing and allocation of spectrum was to be settled between the Ministry of Finance and the Telecom Dept. Initially, of course, the Finance Ministry did ask for a high price of spectrum but after many discussions, the two ministries agreed that as far as 2G is concerned, we have to live with the present system (now finance ministry is also involved. He knows that it is Pranab da who can take care) particularly with regard to the amount of spectrum that is built and embedded into a license agreement. So this is the background why I did not proceed further with this matter of pricing of spectrum, because if the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Telecom both agree and they have the obligation of the Cabinet Decision of 2003 to decide on the matter and also since TRAI is an expert body and Telecom Commission has experts, if all of them are of the same view, I did not feel I was in a position to insist that auctions must be insisted (no cross checking and no self belief).
1 a) supplementary Q: Sale of spectrum 2 companies even before roll out, a scam was staring everybody in the face …?
Ans PM: I do not know, frankly speaking what was the motivation of people who got spectrum but I know that as far as the basic policy is concerned, that I thought was as it was then the prevailing practice and Raja was continuing that policy, that as far as who gets licenses, the first come first serve policy, how it was implemented, that was never discussed with me (It is nothing more than washing of his hands). Licenses was not matter which got referred to me or to the Cabinet that was the decision exclusively of the telecom minister. Now subsequent events have shown that Companies sold their equity but I was told that they had not sold it to shareholders. They have sold it in a manner to dilute the equity of the promoters. Now if they have to roll out they require money, and that money can be raised either by way of borrowings, or by way of diluting equity by getting in more people. Therefore at that stage I did not think that I should intervene in that affair (even at that stage when every one was showing that something had gone fishy, PM was indecisive).
The other thing that you have mentioned about Mr. Raja being inducted into the Cabinet, I cannot divulge what went on in the processes of Cabinet formation but I would like to mention that we are a coalition government. In a coalition government, you can suggest your preferences but you have to go by what the leader of that particular coalition party ultimately insists. And Mr. Raja along with Mr. Maran was the choice of the DMK party. And as of that moment, I had no reason, frankly speaking, to feel that anything seriously wrong had been done (but you have similar feeling even now. so why Raja has gone). And therefore I did not feel that I had the authority to object to Mr. Raja’s entry because I quite honestly in May 2009, although complaints were coming from all sides, and some were from those companies which had not benefitted, some were from those which had benefitted but not benefitted adequately and therefore I was not in a position to make up my mind (SO it is cost of indecision of PM) that anything seriously was wrong with Mr. Raja’s doing at that time.
Q 2. Asianet - Prashant Raghuvamsam - 5 States are going for elections soon. And you are back from Kerala, what is the feedback about the chances for your party in Kerala? And another question one of the hot subjects is corruption in judiciary, there are allegations even against a former Chief Justice. Justice Krishna Iyer says that you are silent on this matter. How will you react to this?
Ans PM: I just come back from Kerala. I do believe that the Congress party has a very good chance to return to power. Winds of change are blowing that way and I hope this change will materialise. With regard to corruption in judiciary, corruption in any walk of life, whether it is in judiciary, executive, legislature, should be a matter of concern to all thinking people in our country and therefore I am second to none, in saying that if there is corruption, whether it is in judiciary, or in executive or in other walks of life, we must get rid of that.
Q 3. Bloomberg-UTV, Pranjal Sharma –No positive, constructive economic agenda– What ever steps are being taken are being stalled at the Parliament level, stalled by the states or by the opposition parties or even in some cases by industry. No big reformist wave coming from UPA2. Have we lost the will to take hard reformist decisions?
Ans PM: No way, We have not lost the will. We will persist. There are difficulties when Parliament is not allowed to function. When the opposition led states for example do not wish to cooperate over path breaking reforms ushering in single goods and services tax. (is it so clear as you make it appear? is there no point in opposition) This is the reform which is needed. This would make our tax system if the reform comes about, an envy of the world. But the opposition parties, particularly, the BJP has taken a hostile attitude and the reasons that have been given, frankly I cannot mention it in public, they say because you have taken some decision against a particular person, who was a minister in Gujarat, we must reverse it, I don’t want to add further (or you have already added beyond the scripted reply).
The economic agenda is there. We are for example working on a Food Security Bill, the Right to Education Act is now a reality, the ICDS reform is a reality. There have been reforms in the National Rural Health Mission. Same way, we are going to have a fresh wave of infrastructure investment, with the help of the new PPP model. These are not big reforms. And I sincerely hope that in this current budget, you will see a clearer picture of the reform agendas that our Government has. We have not given up, we will persist, when there are difficulties, and particularly when Parliament is not allowed to function, I think Parliament is not able to perform its essential function, being a forum for legislation, you all would agree that that’s one area where our nation has to rethink how our parliamentary institutions should function (all talk no work).
Q -4 CNN-IBN Rajdeep Sardesai You have said that you would like the Parliament to resume functioning in an orderly manner. Are you therefore, on your own part ready to agree to the opposition’s demand for Joint Parliament Committee into the 2G scam, because there is feeling that there was a reluctance both on your part and the part of the Government because you did not want to appear in front of a JPC in the context of the 2G scam and as a supplementary through these months of scams tainted have your ever thought of quitting or actually being so frustrated that you feel that your are surrounded by a lot of corrupt people in your Cabinet and therefore have you every thought of throwing your hands up and saying that enough is enough?
PM Ans - While you have raised about my opposition to the JPC of being afraid to appear before it. I am not afraid of appearing before any committee. The PAC is a joint parliamentary committee presided over by a very senior member of the opposition. I have publicly declared that I am willing to appear before the PAC. So I am not afraid of appearing before any committee including a JPC (then why was the denial and delay?). And this is entirely a wrong impression that I was the one who was blocking the agreement about the JPC because I did not want to appear before the JPC. I have always said that as Prime Minister my conduct must be like Caesar’s wife above suspicion and I am quite prepared to appear before any committee that may go into this.
Q-4 a) supplementary – Did you at any stage think of quitting…?
Ans PM - No
Q 4-b) supplementary And would you concede that there are a lot of corrupt people in your government and you are not able to act against and that led you to believe that enough is enough?
Ans PM I think in a coalition government there is a coalition dharma and obliviously the things are not entirely the way I would like them to be but quite frankly I have never felt like resigning because I have a job to do. The country voted our party to be the leader of the UPA coalition and we have a lot of unfinished business to accomplish and therefore I have never thought in terms of giving up half way and I will stay the course.
Q 5 Al Jajira, Prerna Suri - I would like to talk about current unrest in the Middle East. Do you have any worries that the unrest is seen in the middle east right now might resurface here in India in any rest of regions be that J&K, in North east, or any other areas under Maoists rebels as well and my supplementary is also that that the Arab world is witnessing a revolution at the moment, do you support the new movements that new are coming up in Iran, in Yemen, in Algeria or Bahrain?
PM Ans - Well, Whatever happens in the Gulf or West Asia including the countries that you have mentioned is a matter of concern to us. We have five million Indians working in the Gulf countries and if peace is not prevalent, if orderly processes of the management of the economy and polity break down that could affects this vital community to Indian citizens who are working and contributing to the development of the countries of West Asia. Now the other questioned you have asked that there is a danger something like that happening in India, no, because India is a functioning democracy, people already have a right to change governments, we have a free press, I think even when that the government didn’t agree, I think, they are free, absolutely free to pursue what the path that they want to pursue and therefore there is not question the thing that have happened in Egypt or in other Arab countries can be replicated in India.
Q 5 a) Supplementary – And Sir, do you support the current revolution in Middle East?
PM Ans - Let me say IF the people of Egypt want to move towards the processes of democratization, they have our good wishes. And that’s true of all countries. We have a functioning democracy, Do we do not believe it is our business to advise other countries, we welcome the dawn of democracy everywhere.
Q 6. Doordarshan -Neelam Sharma Kehte hai ki girte hain shah sawar maidane jang me, wo tifal kya girenge jo ghutno ke bal chale. Sarkar ki apni chunauti hain aur sarkar un chunautiyon se nipatne ki puri koshish bhi kar rahi hai aur bhrashtachar aapki is samay sabse bari chunauti bani hui hai lekin log yah dekhna chahti hai ki bhrashtachariyon ko saja mile log ye chahte hain ki wo apne jiwan kal me aisa hote huye dekhe. Kya aapko nahi lagta ki ye is samay iss sandesh ko dene ki sarkar ki sabse bari jarurat hai.
PM Ans – Main aapke madhyam se Bharat ki janta ko yah wada deta hu ki hum puri koshish karenge ki jo logo ne kuchh galat baat ki hai unko jaroor unki kari saja milni chahiye.
Q 7. E TV, Sriharsha – As a question about this Telangana a vexed problem – it has been lingering for quite sometime and there is a complain that Congress seems to be undecided on the issue. And where does the Congress stand on this, and what about the Government policy because the Srikishna committee has submitted its report. Till now the process of dialogue is continuing but no decision has been taken yet.
PM Ans – I think this is a complicated issue and we are trying to evolve a consensus. The Home Minister has one round of meeting with all the political parties, he will call these political parties again because the first round was just handling over them the Srikrishna Committee Report. Now they are studying it . After that will come the phase of consultation with all political parties who are active in Andhra Pradesh, that process will must be allowed to be pursued to its logical conclusion.
Q 7-a) Supplementary - If there is no consensus Mr. Prime Minister, what will be the Government’s stand?
PM Ans – I cannot answer the hypothetical question, we will cross the bridge when we come to it.
Q 8. Kolkata TV, Subhashish Moitra : Sir for last few months, UPA has been facing two major issues i.e. price rise and corruption. My question a)can it affect the alliance and can it break the UPA alliance from within and b) Is there any chance of having relations with the Left?
PM Ans - I think, the Left is no longer a part of our coalition so I don’t know how to answer your question. As far as coalition partners presently are concerned I think, ours is a strong coalition. Our allies are as committed to strengthening the hands of coalition government as anybody else so there is no danger that there might be inner tensions which might lead to break up of this coalition. We are a strong government, we are a strong coalition and our coalition partners are with us….
Q- 9 CNBC Awaz Sanjay Pugalia, : Long term fund ki jarurat hai infrastructure ke liye, kafi dino se discuss hua hai ki kuchh karenge, lekin sabse jis growth ki baat apne abhi baat ki kuchh inflation hum isliye allow karenge kyonki growth chahiye to ye pending agenda hai. Kuchh specific kadam udhane ja rage hai aap jisase ki long term funding ho sake jo ki hamare recourses aur banking se to nahi ho paya.
PM Ans – We must I think create a viable corporate debt market. I think that’s the direction in which we must move. The other is to mobilize funds from outside. I think, there has been a discussion about the creation about infrastructure development fund. Some discussions are going on and most probably the Finance Minister will outline something in that direction.
Q-9 a) Supplementary – Inflation ke issue pe agriculture ka doosra structructural reform jo aapne 1991 me silsila shuru kiya wo overdue hai bahut ruka hua hai, batchit to hui hai uspar, kuchh concrete measures aap karayiye uske bagair nahi hoga!
PM Ans – The basic issue there is the reform of the marketing system, now this is in the domain of the state governments, and we have been discussion with the State governments, with the Chief Ministers that they should do something in that area. It is an essay in persuasion, and somewhere we are succeeding, and some we are not succeeding. So we must persist that’s the only way in federal polity that we are to move forward.
Q 10. NDTV Pronoy Roy, : You have now three and half years to go for next election. Normally the first period after election is a honeymoon period and most enjoyable and most decisions are taken. Its not been the case it has been pretty tough year and a half. You are facing a kind of double incumbency going to the next election. Attacks from opposition and a lot of random attack from your party as well. Double incumbency is the worst way to face the second election. Opposition attacks you cannot control but within your party does it sadden you to see these attacks repeatedly happening popping up. Would you be happy to be a prime ministerial candidate if asked in the next elections….
PM Ans – Well, It is too early we have still to long way. I have to complete this term. As far as next term is concerned it is too premature from me to speculate who will be the candidate.
I would of course to like a cohesive party to back the government and I do not get a feeling that that cohesion does not exist. I think we are a democratic party, we have a lot of internal discussions. When decisions are taken, I think, our party stands united in support of the government.
Q 10 a) Supplementary – You are talking about unfair criticism of lame duck and the sense of drift that you the most honest prime minister are surrounded by a very dishonest administration. How will you change this drift. Are you going to have a major reshuffle?
PM Ans : Well, I have said that after the budget session of Parliament is over, there will be a restructuring – a reshuffle of the Cabinet. I hope and I think I will get back to the task once the budget session of Parliament is over.
Q 11. News 24, Anuradha Prasad : On the consensus with opposition of JPC. …. Will the budget session be smooth unlike the last session.
PM Ans – Puri puri koshish ki ja rahi hai ki koi na koi rasta nikal jaye aur mujhe asha hai ki aisa sambhaw ho sakta hai.
Supplementary – On the cricket world cup – and your favourite player.
PM Ans – I am one with the wishes of my country men and women, that India should win this World Cup. I would not like to say that I choose among the players but I have some preferences, which I would not like to mention.
Q 12. CNN, Sara Sidner :On Food inflation versus GDP of say 8.5%.
PM Ans – Let me say that the food inflation certainly hurts the poor. The poor labourers spend nearly 60 percent of their income on food items and therefore the food price rise disproportionately that does hurt the poor most. Now at the same time you must appreciate we have put in place a social safety net. The biggest single social safety net is the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme which guarantees to each labourer who offers himself for employment a daily wage of Rs. 100/- to which we have said that we will adjust this wage with every rise in the consumer price index. So therefore I think, although the inflation does hurt, we have put in place social safety net which was not there six years before and that does not mean that we should not work together to improve I think the situation. Further more, I would like to mention that as far as the food grains distributed through public distribution system is concerned there has been no change in prices since year 2002. In the last eight years we have kept these prices constant so therefore where the public distribution system operates together with the real wage protection in view of the inflationary trends, these are the two most important means in which we are trying to insulate the poor from the ill effects of food inflation.
Q 13 New Live 24/7, Zarir Hussein – On North East peace process. Is the Government of India committed to a time bound solution to ULFA problem…. NSCN talks have been going on for 14 years without tangible results. … Your thoughts on Assam Election due in two months.
PM Ans - I think, our government in Assam has done very well. The fact that peace process is also going forward is an added factor which would strengthen the ruling party in Assam. As far as the fixing of a time limit is concerned I think the process has just started. It would bring me greatest happiness if we can say that we can complete it immediately but I know that we are dealing with a difficult problem. It is an essay in mutual comprehension. We have just now started talking to ULFA, they came and called on me and I am very happy with what they told me and I assured them that the Government of India is absolutely serious to find an honorable solution to the all these issues but it would be wrong on my part to say that right now I can fix the time limit that will be our effort.
Q 13 a) Supplementary – Will Congress make a hat-trick in Assam.
PM Ans - I hope, I think they do.
Q 14. – Upedra Rai, Sahara Samay – On GoMs decision to abolish Minister’s discretionary quota. How will you do that.
PM Ans – Ye issue ek hai jo Congress President ne apne bhashan me aur all India Congress Committee ke Session me is baat ki charcha ki thi un tamam wishayo par batchit karne ke liye humne ek Group of Minister ko ye kam saumpa hai aur Pranb Mukherjee uske Chairman hai aur ek issue usme ye bhi hai ki jo discretionary powers Ministers ke hai unko khatam kiya jaye. Unhe iss baat par wichar karna hoga ki kya kuchh kiya ja sakta hai kya kuchh kiya nahi ja sakta hia. Abhi Saat ( sixty) din Unko diye gaya hai report dene ke liye. Main us report ka intezaar kar raha hu.
Q- 14 a) Supplementary – On fall in FDI. Kahan galti hui.
PM Ans – Galti hamari nahi huyi. International environment aisa hai ki funds, Un dino me tamam emerging markets se fund kuchh wapas gaye hai. – We are today functioning in an environment where what happens outside affects us. And therefore, it is not easy to say that what happens to the fund flow is entirely a function of our policy. It is also a function of what policies our other friends particularly the developed countries adopt and it is that process that is…. But I do agree that we need to strengthen our resolve to create a favourable environment for larger flow of fund from aboard.
Q 15. Shahi Zamam, Star News : On moral responsibility towards corruption charges on the Government.
PM Ans – Mujhe apni jimmedari ka ehsaas hai. Isme aapko koi shak nahi hona chahiye. Lekin meri kuchh majbooriya bhi hai, Coalition politics me bahut kuchh sahna parta hai. Ya to phir ye ho ki yaha har 6 mahine me naye election karaye jaye. Aisa bhi karna uchit nahi hoga. So some comprises have to be made in managing a coalition government and those issues therefore have to be used in the context in which no single party, I think, emerges which can rule by itself.
Q 15 a) Supplementary – Have you every felt that the present politics is not suitable to your nature as a large part of your life has been outside it.
PM Ans - Bahut si chijen hai jo mere mizaz ke sath milti nahi hain. I have looked upon life as one long continues learning and relearning process and for me I think it has been a great educational experience, from civil service, from academic world to the political world I think it is a process of learning and I certainly relish that experience.
Q 16. Arnab Goswami, Times Now – On compromise with corruption because of coalition ; On Devas deal – delayed action – backroom talks in PM’s office .
PM Ans – There have been no backroom talks. I think I have not met anybody myself and the decision of the Space Commission to annul the deal was taken on 2nd July, 2010. Space Commission took a number of decision of which annulment of the contract was one of them. The Dept of Space was asked to take action on all the five decision points that emerged from the Space Commission meeting. The issue of how to annul the contract required consideration by legal experts and the Law Ministry was consulted. A decision had to be taken on whether to annul the contract using article 7(C) or Article 11 or both read together. Eventually it has been decided that the Government should take a sovereign policy decision regarding the utilization of Space Band capacity which uses S Band spectrum having regard to the country’s strategic requirements.
I would like to mention that although the Space Commission took a decision to annul the contract in July 2010, the actual Cabinet note was received from the Deptt of Space in the PMO only in November 2010. And even then there was a number of consultations to polish it up. At the most you can say that between November and now the Prime Minister’s Office has got this note ready for the Cabinet. Decision has been taken now but it requires consultations. (Intervention) - After the receipt of the note for the Cabinet from the Dept of Space for preparation of the Cabinet note a number of ministries were consulted and the Dept of Space itself took six revisions of the note before finally submitting it for approval.
It is certainly true that a number of letters were received by members of Space Commission including officials in the PMO from Devas after August 2010 including as late as a few days ago. Letters were also received in the PMO from the US Chamber of Commerce but no action was taken on any of these letters which were merely filed. At no stage was Dept of Space asked by the PMO to comment on the points made in the letters. They have no impact whatsoever on the processing of the case. On the contrary, the PMO followed up its verbal reminders to Dept of Space by sending a letter to the Dept of Space in October 2010 seeking a status of follow up of the decision taken by the Space Commission in its July 2010 meeting.
The matter was never raised by the German Minister of Foreign Affairs during his meeting with me in New Delhi on 18 October. I think some people have reported that the German Foreign Minister raised it with me. The meeting did take place but he never mentioned anything. It is a fact that the meetings did take place between Devas and officials of the Dept of Space, ISRO and Antrix after July last year since the agreement had not actually been annulled. But no further actions were taken by the Deptt of Space or ISRO to implement the agreement. No assurance was given in contravention of the recommendations of the Space Commission. Though there has been some delay in processing which were only procedural.
The fact is that the contract was not operational in any practical sense and there was no question of diluting in any way the recommendations of the Space Commission. All the consultations are now almost complete. The Ministries concerned have all had the opportunity to express their views as is required before having policy decisions taken by the Government at the level of the Cabinet, and also because this issue concerns many other Ministries apart from the Dept. of Space. These include Deptt of Telecommunation, Defence, Home, Finance and Law. The matter is expected to be put before Cabinet Committee on Security for its final decision. That’s the state of the affairs. There have been no effort in the Prime Minister’s office to dilute, in any way the decision taken by the Space Commission in July 2010. On that I would like to assure you and through you I would like to assure the country.
Q 17 Ramakrishnan, SunTV : On fishermen issue with Srilankan Government.
PM Ans – I have been told that about 118 fishermen have been taken into custody. We are taking up this matter with the Sri Lankan Government. We take a very serious view. I think only earlier in this month, the Foreign Secretary to make a strong demarche …..This kind of behaviour is not acceptable among neighbouring countries.
Qn. Tamil Nadu is going for assembly elections. What is your assessment on TN elections.
PM: I am not an astrologer but I do hope that the ruling coalition will win.
Q 18 Sanjay Majumdar – BBC – British Aid – Why do we still need the international aid.
PM Ans : India still is a poor country. And it is certainly true if aid is not forthcoming we will not collapse but I think we have the capacity to make good use of development assistance and if some friendly country offers large amount of money by way of concessional development support, I don’t see reason why we should decline to accept.
Q 18 a) Supplementary question – Image of India taken a beating after the scams.
PM: Let me say that this sort of atmosphere is not good. It saps our own self confidence, it also spoils the image of India and therefore I urge each one of you that in reporting these events, while opinions are a matter of speculation, facts are sacred. And facts should not be distorted. Opinions, you can freely express views, which are one’s held convictions, but we owe it to our country that when it comes to reporting country’s affairs, atleast when it comes to dealing with the facts, they should be as objective as is possible.
Q 19. Satish K. Singh, Zee News. Aapne yeh press conference kyon bulayi? Brashtachar ke mudde pe aap bahut serious hai. Lok Pal, Black money, State funding of elections. Malam in budget. Will you accept any of your mistakes.
PM Ans : A Group of Ministers is looking into all aspects of how to deal with corruption. Also it is not certainly true that we have not dealt with black money problem, the effort is on to sign treaties or to revise treaties which would enable us to get information from the affected countries where this money is stored. We will take all possible measures to control this menace of black money, to bring back to our country the money which is legally ours.
Q 19) CNN IBN – Rajdeep Sardesai Home Minister spoke of the governance deficit, your telecom minister spoke of zero revenue loss on 2G, these are two statements. Where do you stand in the 2G scam, where do you stand on the Home Minister’s governance deficit statement.
PM Ans : Obviously if the events have taken place, they do bring out the weaknesses in the governance, or you may call them ethical deficit, I don’t deny that we need to improve the quality of governance that’s not a subject which divides me and other members of the Cabinet. With regard to the loss of revenues, it is very much dependent on what is your starting point. There are various estimates, but you have to assess what is the right magnitude after asking yourself what was the right price. Now, I have explained to you that the then existing policy of the Government was that auctions should not take place. And if auctions are not taking place then what is the basis for you to calculate a loss. I am not in a position to say that there is a foolproof method in which one can determine the extent of the loss. It is very much a function of what is your starting point. And also depends upon our opinion we have a budget which gives subsidy for food, 80,000 crores per annum, some people may say these foodgrains should be sold at market place. Will we say then because they are not sold at market prices, because you are giving them a subsidy, it is a loss of 80,000 crores. We give subsidy to fertilisers which cost about 60,000 crores every year people can say that these fertilisers should be priced at the market rate, would you then say that there is a loss of revenue of 60,000 crores in fertilisers sale. We subsidise the price of kerosene to an extent which is greater than many other subsidies, that imposes burden on our oil marketing companies, should we say then that because we give subsidy for kerosene sales under public distribution, that there is loss of revenue.
Q 19 a) Are you disagreeing with what CAG said, or are you agreeing with what your Telecom minister has said.
PM Ans : I think the CAG himself has said that it is presumptive loss. And therefore, it depends upon which assumptions you make. I would not like to intervene.
Q 20. Times Now, Arnab Goswami In October you said 90 days for CWG probe, it is now more than 90 days. Do you feel disappointed with the progress of the CWG probe.
PM Ans : We are trying our very best but we had to go through the due process of law. We are a country where the rule of law prevails, sometimes, it is very frustrating that it takes time. But you have my assurance that wrong doers will not escape this time.
Q 21. NDTV Pronoy Roy It is very difficult to calculate the loss. There is subsidy in the allocation of 2G licences. Do you think it should have been an auction.
PM Ans : I think you have to take a decision at that particular time. Of all the decisions that I take, it is 7 out of 10 turn out to be correct. The shareholders of a normal corporation will say a job well done. We are living in a world of uncertainty. Many things ex-ante you think do not turn out to be ex-post. Therefore there is a gap between ex-ante thinking and what has emerged as a reality subsequently.
Q 22. CNN-IBN – Rajdeep Sardesai. Biggest regret and biggest achievement in UPA 2
PM Ans : It is a big regret that these irregularities have happened, these should not have happened. That is certain I am not very happy about these developments. Achievements, the very fact that despite very unfavourable international economic environment, we have managed to ensure that our economy’s growth rhythm is not grossly affected. (Source: http://pmindia.nic.in/)
February 16, 2011
New Delhi
Preliminary transcript
PM’s opening remarks
It is real pleasure meeting you on this auspicious occasion when we are all celebrating the birthday of Hazrat Mohammad Shah . Today is Eid and on this occasion I would like to felicitate all our country men and women and extend my greetings. May this Eid bring, added peace and prosperity to the people of India.
During the last couple of months, the media have drawn the country’s attention to some aberrations whether in the form of allocation of 2G spectrum, the Commonwealth Games and more recently some developments in the Space organization, Adarsh society affairs. I think media have played a very important role in drawing the country’s attention to these issues which require corrective action. I wish to assure you and I wish to assure the country as a whole that our Government is dead serious in bringing to book all the wrong doers, regardless of the position they may occupy. However I would like to say that in projecting these events an impression has gone round (and PM does not care for the impression) that we are a scam-driven country and that nothing good is happening in our country. In the process, believingly, I think we are weakening the self-confidence of the people of India (Really!! or it is about self confidence of government). I don’t that it is in the interest of anybody in our country. We have a functioning government, and whatever some people may say that we are a lame duck government that I am a lame duck prime minister, we take our job very seriously, we are here to govern and to govern effectively, tackle the problems as they arise and get this country moving forward on a pace of development which would do justice to the demands being made on the process of governance.
I wish to tell you that our economy is in good shape ( Indicators of health of economy should be revisited). We will have a growth rate of 8.5 percent this fiscal year and that the way India has come out and tackled the aftermath of international financial crisis, I think does our country a great credit. It is certainly true that in recent months inflation and food inflation in particular has been a problem. We want to deal it in a manner that the growth rhythm is not disturbed. If we were concerned with only curbing inflation I think we could have done it by pursuing tighter monetary policies, we could have brought about a situation where price rise could be moderated. But if in the process, growth process gets hurt I think that would not do our country any good and we are trying to deal with inflation at a time when we don’t have all instruments at our command in the sense that we do not have control over international events. We are now increasingly an open economy and the oil prices are rising, the food prices are rising, commodity prices are rising, we have to deal with inflation despite an adverse international environment and you have my assurance that we will succeed. And at the end of the fiscal year, the inflation rate should come down to no more than 7 percent (These words will be reevaluated).
Also I would like to mention that internal security of the country has been a great concern. I wouldn’t like to say that we are not worried about terrorist acts. We are better prepared to deal with acts of terror and prevent many potential terrorist acts and I think the Government deserves some credit. In the North East, things are getting normalized. Talks are going to begin with ULFA and the ULFA leadership (The real Ulfa is still out) having decided to give up the path up violence is a welcome development which will have far reaching consequences for the growth process in our North Eastern States.
In same way, in J&K, after some turbulence there are I think signs we are getting the situation under control and that the people of J&K can look forward to orderly development of development processes. A number of committees are working to chart out that path and Dr. Rangarajan is preparing a report on the employment aspects, and if that report is implemented, it would bring a fresh ray of hope to young people in J&K who are eagerly searching for productive employment opportunities (surprisingly employment is not their demand).
As far as the external situation is concerned, I think this fiscal year, all the top leaders of the five permanent members of Security Council have visited our country. This has never happened before and the world today appreciates that India is a democracy, a functioning democracy, committed to the rule of law, committed to respect of fundamental human rights, is trying to seek its economic and social salvation in the framework of democracy and rapidly expanding the economy too. Wherever I go, people marvel that there is a country like India, a country of a billion people, a functioning democracy, committed to the rule of law, committed to respect for all fundamental human freedoms and yet managing to grow at the rate of 8-9% per annum (is committing to law and growth contradictory aspects). People marvel that this can be done and whatever our own domestic weaknesses I think, we should not create an atmosphere whereby the nation loses its sense of self confidence.
The media has an obligation, the Government has an obligation, the Opposition has an obligation that we work together in a spirit that India as a whole has to march forward. Parliament has not been allowed to function for reasons which I am not able to understand (When whole country understand and PM does not understand then PM should check his understanding). But we are making an honest effort to ensure that the next session of parliament will be an orderly session. We have important legislations apart from the budget to put before parliament and talks are going on with the opposition parties to ensure that whatever our differences, parliament should be allowed to function normally.
So I would wish to mention to you that in reporting the affairs of our nation, we mustn’t focus excessively on the negative features important though it is that the government should deal with them, to take effective action and you have my assurance that wherever such corrective action is required, our government will take that action and will bring the wrong doers to book. With these words, I once again welcome you to this session of interaction. The Media has, as I said, a very important role to play in a functioning democracy that India is and let us work together to revitalize the spirit of rejuvenation, spirit of self confidence that we have problems, but we also have credible mechanisms to overcome them. We shall overcome, we shall prevail. We will provide our country a functioning effective government and that’s what I wanted to say in the very beginning now the floor is entirely yours.
Question and Answer session.
Q.1 Aaj Tak Arun Purie : Mr. Prime Minister, thank you for inviting us for the interaction. I hope you have more of them (with a hind sight it can be told that it better that he does not appear again). I am sorry to take you back to the 2G scam although you have said that it should not be a scam oriented coverage and you have taken some very positive steps and as you have just assured us that you will get the wrong doers of the 2G scam. Just for my better understanding of how we got into this situation, you had warned Mr. Raja in November 2007 to consider ing auction of the 2G spectrum at 2007 rates and he actually disregarded your advice. And later on in 2008 the companies which got the spectrum sold it for large sums of money, the values which are in the public domain. Inspite of all this you appointed him again as the Telecom Minister. What was your thinking behind this?
Ans PM: Let me first deal with what I said to Mr. Raja in a letter that I wrote to him on 2nd of November 2007. I mentioned in that letter number of concerns which were being expressed, some in the press, some telecom companies used to come and mention to me. I listed a number of issues and I said to him that you must look into these issues and ensure that they are dealt with in a fair, equitable and transparent manner. One of the issues that I asked him to look into was the possibility from legal and technical angle of having an auction of spectrum. Mr. Raja wrote back to me almost on the same day, or our letters crossed (even that not sure). He said, I have been absolutely transparent in my dealings, I will be so in the future, and you have my assurance that I have done nothing and will do nothing which will not be consistent with the promise that I am making.
Now as far as auction is concerned, he came back to me and said (Did he stop you from checking it) auction is something which has not been suggested by TRAI, also not suggested by the Telecom Commission and he also said that if we have an auction, it would not give a level playing field for the new comers, because the existing players have got their spectrum free of charge of about 10 megahertz. Therefore he said the TRAI’s advice, Telecom Commission’s advice and his own view was that auctions are not the way forward at least for 2G spectrum and he also mentioned in a subsequent letter that he is agreeable to auction of 3G spectrum. But with regard to 2G spectrum, he was very clear that he should stay with the then existing approach (Raja was clear and Maharaja was not).
And this was also discussed with the Finance Ministry because in terms of the Cabinet decision of 2003 the pricing and allocation of spectrum was to be settled between the Ministry of Finance and the Telecom Dept. Initially, of course, the Finance Ministry did ask for a high price of spectrum but after many discussions, the two ministries agreed that as far as 2G is concerned, we have to live with the present system (now finance ministry is also involved. He knows that it is Pranab da who can take care) particularly with regard to the amount of spectrum that is built and embedded into a license agreement. So this is the background why I did not proceed further with this matter of pricing of spectrum, because if the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Telecom both agree and they have the obligation of the Cabinet Decision of 2003 to decide on the matter and also since TRAI is an expert body and Telecom Commission has experts, if all of them are of the same view, I did not feel I was in a position to insist that auctions must be insisted (no cross checking and no self belief).
1 a) supplementary Q: Sale of spectrum 2 companies even before roll out, a scam was staring everybody in the face …?
Ans PM: I do not know, frankly speaking what was the motivation of people who got spectrum but I know that as far as the basic policy is concerned, that I thought was as it was then the prevailing practice and Raja was continuing that policy, that as far as who gets licenses, the first come first serve policy, how it was implemented, that was never discussed with me (It is nothing more than washing of his hands). Licenses was not matter which got referred to me or to the Cabinet that was the decision exclusively of the telecom minister. Now subsequent events have shown that Companies sold their equity but I was told that they had not sold it to shareholders. They have sold it in a manner to dilute the equity of the promoters. Now if they have to roll out they require money, and that money can be raised either by way of borrowings, or by way of diluting equity by getting in more people. Therefore at that stage I did not think that I should intervene in that affair (even at that stage when every one was showing that something had gone fishy, PM was indecisive).
The other thing that you have mentioned about Mr. Raja being inducted into the Cabinet, I cannot divulge what went on in the processes of Cabinet formation but I would like to mention that we are a coalition government. In a coalition government, you can suggest your preferences but you have to go by what the leader of that particular coalition party ultimately insists. And Mr. Raja along with Mr. Maran was the choice of the DMK party. And as of that moment, I had no reason, frankly speaking, to feel that anything seriously wrong had been done (but you have similar feeling even now. so why Raja has gone). And therefore I did not feel that I had the authority to object to Mr. Raja’s entry because I quite honestly in May 2009, although complaints were coming from all sides, and some were from those companies which had not benefitted, some were from those which had benefitted but not benefitted adequately and therefore I was not in a position to make up my mind (SO it is cost of indecision of PM) that anything seriously was wrong with Mr. Raja’s doing at that time.
Q 2. Asianet - Prashant Raghuvamsam - 5 States are going for elections soon. And you are back from Kerala, what is the feedback about the chances for your party in Kerala? And another question one of the hot subjects is corruption in judiciary, there are allegations even against a former Chief Justice. Justice Krishna Iyer says that you are silent on this matter. How will you react to this?
Ans PM: I just come back from Kerala. I do believe that the Congress party has a very good chance to return to power. Winds of change are blowing that way and I hope this change will materialise. With regard to corruption in judiciary, corruption in any walk of life, whether it is in judiciary, executive, legislature, should be a matter of concern to all thinking people in our country and therefore I am second to none, in saying that if there is corruption, whether it is in judiciary, or in executive or in other walks of life, we must get rid of that.
Q 3. Bloomberg-UTV, Pranjal Sharma –No positive, constructive economic agenda– What ever steps are being taken are being stalled at the Parliament level, stalled by the states or by the opposition parties or even in some cases by industry. No big reformist wave coming from UPA2. Have we lost the will to take hard reformist decisions?
Ans PM: No way, We have not lost the will. We will persist. There are difficulties when Parliament is not allowed to function. When the opposition led states for example do not wish to cooperate over path breaking reforms ushering in single goods and services tax. (is it so clear as you make it appear? is there no point in opposition) This is the reform which is needed. This would make our tax system if the reform comes about, an envy of the world. But the opposition parties, particularly, the BJP has taken a hostile attitude and the reasons that have been given, frankly I cannot mention it in public, they say because you have taken some decision against a particular person, who was a minister in Gujarat, we must reverse it, I don’t want to add further (or you have already added beyond the scripted reply).
The economic agenda is there. We are for example working on a Food Security Bill, the Right to Education Act is now a reality, the ICDS reform is a reality. There have been reforms in the National Rural Health Mission. Same way, we are going to have a fresh wave of infrastructure investment, with the help of the new PPP model. These are not big reforms. And I sincerely hope that in this current budget, you will see a clearer picture of the reform agendas that our Government has. We have not given up, we will persist, when there are difficulties, and particularly when Parliament is not allowed to function, I think Parliament is not able to perform its essential function, being a forum for legislation, you all would agree that that’s one area where our nation has to rethink how our parliamentary institutions should function (all talk no work).
Q -4 CNN-IBN Rajdeep Sardesai You have said that you would like the Parliament to resume functioning in an orderly manner. Are you therefore, on your own part ready to agree to the opposition’s demand for Joint Parliament Committee into the 2G scam, because there is feeling that there was a reluctance both on your part and the part of the Government because you did not want to appear in front of a JPC in the context of the 2G scam and as a supplementary through these months of scams tainted have your ever thought of quitting or actually being so frustrated that you feel that your are surrounded by a lot of corrupt people in your Cabinet and therefore have you every thought of throwing your hands up and saying that enough is enough?
PM Ans - While you have raised about my opposition to the JPC of being afraid to appear before it. I am not afraid of appearing before any committee. The PAC is a joint parliamentary committee presided over by a very senior member of the opposition. I have publicly declared that I am willing to appear before the PAC. So I am not afraid of appearing before any committee including a JPC (then why was the denial and delay?). And this is entirely a wrong impression that I was the one who was blocking the agreement about the JPC because I did not want to appear before the JPC. I have always said that as Prime Minister my conduct must be like Caesar’s wife above suspicion and I am quite prepared to appear before any committee that may go into this.
Q-4 a) supplementary – Did you at any stage think of quitting…?
Ans PM - No
Q 4-b) supplementary And would you concede that there are a lot of corrupt people in your government and you are not able to act against and that led you to believe that enough is enough?
Ans PM I think in a coalition government there is a coalition dharma and obliviously the things are not entirely the way I would like them to be but quite frankly I have never felt like resigning because I have a job to do. The country voted our party to be the leader of the UPA coalition and we have a lot of unfinished business to accomplish and therefore I have never thought in terms of giving up half way and I will stay the course.
Q 5 Al Jajira, Prerna Suri - I would like to talk about current unrest in the Middle East. Do you have any worries that the unrest is seen in the middle east right now might resurface here in India in any rest of regions be that J&K, in North east, or any other areas under Maoists rebels as well and my supplementary is also that that the Arab world is witnessing a revolution at the moment, do you support the new movements that new are coming up in Iran, in Yemen, in Algeria or Bahrain?
PM Ans - Well, Whatever happens in the Gulf or West Asia including the countries that you have mentioned is a matter of concern to us. We have five million Indians working in the Gulf countries and if peace is not prevalent, if orderly processes of the management of the economy and polity break down that could affects this vital community to Indian citizens who are working and contributing to the development of the countries of West Asia. Now the other questioned you have asked that there is a danger something like that happening in India, no, because India is a functioning democracy, people already have a right to change governments, we have a free press, I think even when that the government didn’t agree, I think, they are free, absolutely free to pursue what the path that they want to pursue and therefore there is not question the thing that have happened in Egypt or in other Arab countries can be replicated in India.
Q 5 a) Supplementary – And Sir, do you support the current revolution in Middle East?
PM Ans - Let me say IF the people of Egypt want to move towards the processes of democratization, they have our good wishes. And that’s true of all countries. We have a functioning democracy, Do we do not believe it is our business to advise other countries, we welcome the dawn of democracy everywhere.
Q 6. Doordarshan -Neelam Sharma Kehte hai ki girte hain shah sawar maidane jang me, wo tifal kya girenge jo ghutno ke bal chale. Sarkar ki apni chunauti hain aur sarkar un chunautiyon se nipatne ki puri koshish bhi kar rahi hai aur bhrashtachar aapki is samay sabse bari chunauti bani hui hai lekin log yah dekhna chahti hai ki bhrashtachariyon ko saja mile log ye chahte hain ki wo apne jiwan kal me aisa hote huye dekhe. Kya aapko nahi lagta ki ye is samay iss sandesh ko dene ki sarkar ki sabse bari jarurat hai.
PM Ans – Main aapke madhyam se Bharat ki janta ko yah wada deta hu ki hum puri koshish karenge ki jo logo ne kuchh galat baat ki hai unko jaroor unki kari saja milni chahiye.
Q 7. E TV, Sriharsha – As a question about this Telangana a vexed problem – it has been lingering for quite sometime and there is a complain that Congress seems to be undecided on the issue. And where does the Congress stand on this, and what about the Government policy because the Srikishna committee has submitted its report. Till now the process of dialogue is continuing but no decision has been taken yet.
PM Ans – I think this is a complicated issue and we are trying to evolve a consensus. The Home Minister has one round of meeting with all the political parties, he will call these political parties again because the first round was just handling over them the Srikrishna Committee Report. Now they are studying it . After that will come the phase of consultation with all political parties who are active in Andhra Pradesh, that process will must be allowed to be pursued to its logical conclusion.
Q 7-a) Supplementary - If there is no consensus Mr. Prime Minister, what will be the Government’s stand?
PM Ans – I cannot answer the hypothetical question, we will cross the bridge when we come to it.
Q 8. Kolkata TV, Subhashish Moitra : Sir for last few months, UPA has been facing two major issues i.e. price rise and corruption. My question a)can it affect the alliance and can it break the UPA alliance from within and b) Is there any chance of having relations with the Left?
PM Ans - I think, the Left is no longer a part of our coalition so I don’t know how to answer your question. As far as coalition partners presently are concerned I think, ours is a strong coalition. Our allies are as committed to strengthening the hands of coalition government as anybody else so there is no danger that there might be inner tensions which might lead to break up of this coalition. We are a strong government, we are a strong coalition and our coalition partners are with us….
Q- 9 CNBC Awaz Sanjay Pugalia, : Long term fund ki jarurat hai infrastructure ke liye, kafi dino se discuss hua hai ki kuchh karenge, lekin sabse jis growth ki baat apne abhi baat ki kuchh inflation hum isliye allow karenge kyonki growth chahiye to ye pending agenda hai. Kuchh specific kadam udhane ja rage hai aap jisase ki long term funding ho sake jo ki hamare recourses aur banking se to nahi ho paya.
PM Ans – We must I think create a viable corporate debt market. I think that’s the direction in which we must move. The other is to mobilize funds from outside. I think, there has been a discussion about the creation about infrastructure development fund. Some discussions are going on and most probably the Finance Minister will outline something in that direction.
Q-9 a) Supplementary – Inflation ke issue pe agriculture ka doosra structructural reform jo aapne 1991 me silsila shuru kiya wo overdue hai bahut ruka hua hai, batchit to hui hai uspar, kuchh concrete measures aap karayiye uske bagair nahi hoga!
PM Ans – The basic issue there is the reform of the marketing system, now this is in the domain of the state governments, and we have been discussion with the State governments, with the Chief Ministers that they should do something in that area. It is an essay in persuasion, and somewhere we are succeeding, and some we are not succeeding. So we must persist that’s the only way in federal polity that we are to move forward.
Q 10. NDTV Pronoy Roy, : You have now three and half years to go for next election. Normally the first period after election is a honeymoon period and most enjoyable and most decisions are taken. Its not been the case it has been pretty tough year and a half. You are facing a kind of double incumbency going to the next election. Attacks from opposition and a lot of random attack from your party as well. Double incumbency is the worst way to face the second election. Opposition attacks you cannot control but within your party does it sadden you to see these attacks repeatedly happening popping up. Would you be happy to be a prime ministerial candidate if asked in the next elections….
PM Ans – Well, It is too early we have still to long way. I have to complete this term. As far as next term is concerned it is too premature from me to speculate who will be the candidate.
I would of course to like a cohesive party to back the government and I do not get a feeling that that cohesion does not exist. I think we are a democratic party, we have a lot of internal discussions. When decisions are taken, I think, our party stands united in support of the government.
Q 10 a) Supplementary – You are talking about unfair criticism of lame duck and the sense of drift that you the most honest prime minister are surrounded by a very dishonest administration. How will you change this drift. Are you going to have a major reshuffle?
PM Ans : Well, I have said that after the budget session of Parliament is over, there will be a restructuring – a reshuffle of the Cabinet. I hope and I think I will get back to the task once the budget session of Parliament is over.
Q 11. News 24, Anuradha Prasad : On the consensus with opposition of JPC. …. Will the budget session be smooth unlike the last session.
PM Ans – Puri puri koshish ki ja rahi hai ki koi na koi rasta nikal jaye aur mujhe asha hai ki aisa sambhaw ho sakta hai.
Supplementary – On the cricket world cup – and your favourite player.
PM Ans – I am one with the wishes of my country men and women, that India should win this World Cup. I would not like to say that I choose among the players but I have some preferences, which I would not like to mention.
Q 12. CNN, Sara Sidner :On Food inflation versus GDP of say 8.5%.
PM Ans – Let me say that the food inflation certainly hurts the poor. The poor labourers spend nearly 60 percent of their income on food items and therefore the food price rise disproportionately that does hurt the poor most. Now at the same time you must appreciate we have put in place a social safety net. The biggest single social safety net is the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme which guarantees to each labourer who offers himself for employment a daily wage of Rs. 100/- to which we have said that we will adjust this wage with every rise in the consumer price index. So therefore I think, although the inflation does hurt, we have put in place social safety net which was not there six years before and that does not mean that we should not work together to improve I think the situation. Further more, I would like to mention that as far as the food grains distributed through public distribution system is concerned there has been no change in prices since year 2002. In the last eight years we have kept these prices constant so therefore where the public distribution system operates together with the real wage protection in view of the inflationary trends, these are the two most important means in which we are trying to insulate the poor from the ill effects of food inflation.
Q 13 New Live 24/7, Zarir Hussein – On North East peace process. Is the Government of India committed to a time bound solution to ULFA problem…. NSCN talks have been going on for 14 years without tangible results. … Your thoughts on Assam Election due in two months.
PM Ans - I think, our government in Assam has done very well. The fact that peace process is also going forward is an added factor which would strengthen the ruling party in Assam. As far as the fixing of a time limit is concerned I think the process has just started. It would bring me greatest happiness if we can say that we can complete it immediately but I know that we are dealing with a difficult problem. It is an essay in mutual comprehension. We have just now started talking to ULFA, they came and called on me and I am very happy with what they told me and I assured them that the Government of India is absolutely serious to find an honorable solution to the all these issues but it would be wrong on my part to say that right now I can fix the time limit that will be our effort.
Q 13 a) Supplementary – Will Congress make a hat-trick in Assam.
PM Ans - I hope, I think they do.
Q 14. – Upedra Rai, Sahara Samay – On GoMs decision to abolish Minister’s discretionary quota. How will you do that.
PM Ans – Ye issue ek hai jo Congress President ne apne bhashan me aur all India Congress Committee ke Session me is baat ki charcha ki thi un tamam wishayo par batchit karne ke liye humne ek Group of Minister ko ye kam saumpa hai aur Pranb Mukherjee uske Chairman hai aur ek issue usme ye bhi hai ki jo discretionary powers Ministers ke hai unko khatam kiya jaye. Unhe iss baat par wichar karna hoga ki kya kuchh kiya ja sakta hai kya kuchh kiya nahi ja sakta hia. Abhi Saat ( sixty) din Unko diye gaya hai report dene ke liye. Main us report ka intezaar kar raha hu.
Q- 14 a) Supplementary – On fall in FDI. Kahan galti hui.
PM Ans – Galti hamari nahi huyi. International environment aisa hai ki funds, Un dino me tamam emerging markets se fund kuchh wapas gaye hai. – We are today functioning in an environment where what happens outside affects us. And therefore, it is not easy to say that what happens to the fund flow is entirely a function of our policy. It is also a function of what policies our other friends particularly the developed countries adopt and it is that process that is…. But I do agree that we need to strengthen our resolve to create a favourable environment for larger flow of fund from aboard.
Q 15. Shahi Zamam, Star News : On moral responsibility towards corruption charges on the Government.
PM Ans – Mujhe apni jimmedari ka ehsaas hai. Isme aapko koi shak nahi hona chahiye. Lekin meri kuchh majbooriya bhi hai, Coalition politics me bahut kuchh sahna parta hai. Ya to phir ye ho ki yaha har 6 mahine me naye election karaye jaye. Aisa bhi karna uchit nahi hoga. So some comprises have to be made in managing a coalition government and those issues therefore have to be used in the context in which no single party, I think, emerges which can rule by itself.
Q 15 a) Supplementary – Have you every felt that the present politics is not suitable to your nature as a large part of your life has been outside it.
PM Ans - Bahut si chijen hai jo mere mizaz ke sath milti nahi hain. I have looked upon life as one long continues learning and relearning process and for me I think it has been a great educational experience, from civil service, from academic world to the political world I think it is a process of learning and I certainly relish that experience.
Q 16. Arnab Goswami, Times Now – On compromise with corruption because of coalition ; On Devas deal – delayed action – backroom talks in PM’s office .
PM Ans – There have been no backroom talks. I think I have not met anybody myself and the decision of the Space Commission to annul the deal was taken on 2nd July, 2010. Space Commission took a number of decision of which annulment of the contract was one of them. The Dept of Space was asked to take action on all the five decision points that emerged from the Space Commission meeting. The issue of how to annul the contract required consideration by legal experts and the Law Ministry was consulted. A decision had to be taken on whether to annul the contract using article 7(C) or Article 11 or both read together. Eventually it has been decided that the Government should take a sovereign policy decision regarding the utilization of Space Band capacity which uses S Band spectrum having regard to the country’s strategic requirements.
I would like to mention that although the Space Commission took a decision to annul the contract in July 2010, the actual Cabinet note was received from the Deptt of Space in the PMO only in November 2010. And even then there was a number of consultations to polish it up. At the most you can say that between November and now the Prime Minister’s Office has got this note ready for the Cabinet. Decision has been taken now but it requires consultations. (Intervention) - After the receipt of the note for the Cabinet from the Dept of Space for preparation of the Cabinet note a number of ministries were consulted and the Dept of Space itself took six revisions of the note before finally submitting it for approval.
It is certainly true that a number of letters were received by members of Space Commission including officials in the PMO from Devas after August 2010 including as late as a few days ago. Letters were also received in the PMO from the US Chamber of Commerce but no action was taken on any of these letters which were merely filed. At no stage was Dept of Space asked by the PMO to comment on the points made in the letters. They have no impact whatsoever on the processing of the case. On the contrary, the PMO followed up its verbal reminders to Dept of Space by sending a letter to the Dept of Space in October 2010 seeking a status of follow up of the decision taken by the Space Commission in its July 2010 meeting.
The matter was never raised by the German Minister of Foreign Affairs during his meeting with me in New Delhi on 18 October. I think some people have reported that the German Foreign Minister raised it with me. The meeting did take place but he never mentioned anything. It is a fact that the meetings did take place between Devas and officials of the Dept of Space, ISRO and Antrix after July last year since the agreement had not actually been annulled. But no further actions were taken by the Deptt of Space or ISRO to implement the agreement. No assurance was given in contravention of the recommendations of the Space Commission. Though there has been some delay in processing which were only procedural.
The fact is that the contract was not operational in any practical sense and there was no question of diluting in any way the recommendations of the Space Commission. All the consultations are now almost complete. The Ministries concerned have all had the opportunity to express their views as is required before having policy decisions taken by the Government at the level of the Cabinet, and also because this issue concerns many other Ministries apart from the Dept. of Space. These include Deptt of Telecommunation, Defence, Home, Finance and Law. The matter is expected to be put before Cabinet Committee on Security for its final decision. That’s the state of the affairs. There have been no effort in the Prime Minister’s office to dilute, in any way the decision taken by the Space Commission in July 2010. On that I would like to assure you and through you I would like to assure the country.
Q 17 Ramakrishnan, SunTV : On fishermen issue with Srilankan Government.
PM Ans – I have been told that about 118 fishermen have been taken into custody. We are taking up this matter with the Sri Lankan Government. We take a very serious view. I think only earlier in this month, the Foreign Secretary to make a strong demarche …..This kind of behaviour is not acceptable among neighbouring countries.
Qn. Tamil Nadu is going for assembly elections. What is your assessment on TN elections.
PM: I am not an astrologer but I do hope that the ruling coalition will win.
Q 18 Sanjay Majumdar – BBC – British Aid – Why do we still need the international aid.
PM Ans : India still is a poor country. And it is certainly true if aid is not forthcoming we will not collapse but I think we have the capacity to make good use of development assistance and if some friendly country offers large amount of money by way of concessional development support, I don’t see reason why we should decline to accept.
Q 18 a) Supplementary question – Image of India taken a beating after the scams.
PM: Let me say that this sort of atmosphere is not good. It saps our own self confidence, it also spoils the image of India and therefore I urge each one of you that in reporting these events, while opinions are a matter of speculation, facts are sacred. And facts should not be distorted. Opinions, you can freely express views, which are one’s held convictions, but we owe it to our country that when it comes to reporting country’s affairs, atleast when it comes to dealing with the facts, they should be as objective as is possible.
Q 19. Satish K. Singh, Zee News. Aapne yeh press conference kyon bulayi? Brashtachar ke mudde pe aap bahut serious hai. Lok Pal, Black money, State funding of elections. Malam in budget. Will you accept any of your mistakes.
PM Ans : A Group of Ministers is looking into all aspects of how to deal with corruption. Also it is not certainly true that we have not dealt with black money problem, the effort is on to sign treaties or to revise treaties which would enable us to get information from the affected countries where this money is stored. We will take all possible measures to control this menace of black money, to bring back to our country the money which is legally ours.
Q 19) CNN IBN – Rajdeep Sardesai Home Minister spoke of the governance deficit, your telecom minister spoke of zero revenue loss on 2G, these are two statements. Where do you stand in the 2G scam, where do you stand on the Home Minister’s governance deficit statement.
PM Ans : Obviously if the events have taken place, they do bring out the weaknesses in the governance, or you may call them ethical deficit, I don’t deny that we need to improve the quality of governance that’s not a subject which divides me and other members of the Cabinet. With regard to the loss of revenues, it is very much dependent on what is your starting point. There are various estimates, but you have to assess what is the right magnitude after asking yourself what was the right price. Now, I have explained to you that the then existing policy of the Government was that auctions should not take place. And if auctions are not taking place then what is the basis for you to calculate a loss. I am not in a position to say that there is a foolproof method in which one can determine the extent of the loss. It is very much a function of what is your starting point. And also depends upon our opinion we have a budget which gives subsidy for food, 80,000 crores per annum, some people may say these foodgrains should be sold at market place. Will we say then because they are not sold at market prices, because you are giving them a subsidy, it is a loss of 80,000 crores. We give subsidy to fertilisers which cost about 60,000 crores every year people can say that these fertilisers should be priced at the market rate, would you then say that there is a loss of revenue of 60,000 crores in fertilisers sale. We subsidise the price of kerosene to an extent which is greater than many other subsidies, that imposes burden on our oil marketing companies, should we say then that because we give subsidy for kerosene sales under public distribution, that there is loss of revenue.
Q 19 a) Are you disagreeing with what CAG said, or are you agreeing with what your Telecom minister has said.
PM Ans : I think the CAG himself has said that it is presumptive loss. And therefore, it depends upon which assumptions you make. I would not like to intervene.
Q 20. Times Now, Arnab Goswami In October you said 90 days for CWG probe, it is now more than 90 days. Do you feel disappointed with the progress of the CWG probe.
PM Ans : We are trying our very best but we had to go through the due process of law. We are a country where the rule of law prevails, sometimes, it is very frustrating that it takes time. But you have my assurance that wrong doers will not escape this time.
Q 21. NDTV Pronoy Roy It is very difficult to calculate the loss. There is subsidy in the allocation of 2G licences. Do you think it should have been an auction.
PM Ans : I think you have to take a decision at that particular time. Of all the decisions that I take, it is 7 out of 10 turn out to be correct. The shareholders of a normal corporation will say a job well done. We are living in a world of uncertainty. Many things ex-ante you think do not turn out to be ex-post. Therefore there is a gap between ex-ante thinking and what has emerged as a reality subsequently.
Q 22. CNN-IBN – Rajdeep Sardesai. Biggest regret and biggest achievement in UPA 2
PM Ans : It is a big regret that these irregularities have happened, these should not have happened. That is certain I am not very happy about these developments. Achievements, the very fact that despite very unfavourable international economic environment, we have managed to ensure that our economy’s growth rhythm is not grossly affected. (Source: http://pmindia.nic.in/)
Reaction to Godhra verdict.
After Ayodhya judgment, Godhara judgment has again made few people come out of shell and few others to search for a shelter. It will be discussed for long. It was a turning point in politics of Bharat. It gave rise to post Godhara riot. It certainly gave a support to Mr Modi to retain power in Gujrat. What Gujrat achieved was never in history of Bharat. A group muslims had conspired to kill a group of Ram sevaks, returning from Ayodhya. Now that the verdict is out leaving Dainik Jagaran no other news media house has even attempted to ask a view of the people who suffered. Everyone is concerned about the 63 who had to suffer in the jail for 9 years. What is proved is conspiracy of the crime. Another point which is proved is presence of about 1000 people on the spot of crime. It will be foolish to think that they were accidently there. There were conspirators and there supporters. If it is proved that those 63 were present at the site of carnage then they too are culprits. It is very natural that many people are not included in the central part of conspiracy. Having 31 identified conspirators indicate the magnitude of conspiracy.
What is appalling is focus on Mr Modi. In every English news channel, which I surfed, the accused was Mr Modi and victims were the people who perpetrated this act. I wonder what would have been the reaction of the very channels if the verdicts have gone other way. Congress, Rasthiya Janta Dal, Communist parties along with minor parties who are always in competition to prove themselves and more secular then others, while meaning of secular for them is majority bashing and doling out crump for complaining minority. There were many instances to derail or delay the judgment. POTA was repealed. SIT was constituted and the verdict was stayed multiple times before it came to light.
There was one more fine aspect, which may be overlooked by many. When Godhra and post Godhra had occurred Mr Modi was in line of fire. He was the easiest catch for the opposition. Mr Vajpeyi, then PM wanted to appear moderate and came up with a statement that Mr Modi should follow Rajdharma. These words were picked up by opposition and painted in varied colours to suit their intentions. During those days it was told that given a free chance Vajpeyi would have insisted on replacement of Mr modi but it was Mr Advani who threw weight behind Mr Modi. With a hind sight, Now that the point of Modi is proved apart from the growth which Gujrat has witnessed under leadership of Mr Modi, it would be wise to say that Mr Advani was proved to be right with his perception.
Division of political class over contradictory views is very natural. What is not very natural is permanent division of the media house. Over the time they follow a certain pattern. Most of the daily or weekly newspapers were busy implicating Modi. Bharat will look forward to the verdicts in post Godhara cases. What will be more keenly watched will be reaction to it.
What is appalling is focus on Mr Modi. In every English news channel, which I surfed, the accused was Mr Modi and victims were the people who perpetrated this act. I wonder what would have been the reaction of the very channels if the verdicts have gone other way. Congress, Rasthiya Janta Dal, Communist parties along with minor parties who are always in competition to prove themselves and more secular then others, while meaning of secular for them is majority bashing and doling out crump for complaining minority. There were many instances to derail or delay the judgment. POTA was repealed. SIT was constituted and the verdict was stayed multiple times before it came to light.
There was one more fine aspect, which may be overlooked by many. When Godhra and post Godhra had occurred Mr Modi was in line of fire. He was the easiest catch for the opposition. Mr Vajpeyi, then PM wanted to appear moderate and came up with a statement that Mr Modi should follow Rajdharma. These words were picked up by opposition and painted in varied colours to suit their intentions. During those days it was told that given a free chance Vajpeyi would have insisted on replacement of Mr modi but it was Mr Advani who threw weight behind Mr Modi. With a hind sight, Now that the point of Modi is proved apart from the growth which Gujrat has witnessed under leadership of Mr Modi, it would be wise to say that Mr Advani was proved to be right with his perception.
Division of political class over contradictory views is very natural. What is not very natural is permanent division of the media house. Over the time they follow a certain pattern. Most of the daily or weekly newspapers were busy implicating Modi. Bharat will look forward to the verdicts in post Godhara cases. What will be more keenly watched will be reaction to it.
speech in loksabha
Today I heard Mr Sharad Yadav speaking in parliament. He touched very nice points.
1. One group who has suffered lot due to the independence of Bharat are the tribal group. He was very concern that there was no mention about them in speech of president.
2. In context of decreasing agricultural land he mentioned that Delhi is situated in most fertile land. It should have been in some barren land.
3. He told that getting pat from foreign country head is considered
Bishnu Prasad Ray of Andaman, raised topic of printing of excess currency. It seems government is printing 15% of GDP double of the USA
It seems there was not of value 10000 when independence was achieved. Government withdrew and kept only till 1000. Janata government withdrew currency value 1000. But again government has introduced 1000. It is helping corruption. He supported Swami Ramdev. I have heard Swami Ramdev talking about it.
Mr Thambiduarai raised another point that there is a trend of having centrally sponsored program. This is effecting federal structure of nation. Programs are announced by Delhi but it should be implemented by states. Then state depend on fund allotment by delhi there partiality at that time. centrally sponsored programs like MGNAREGA, a flagship program of UPA is giving rise to more corruption.
He tore into the the argument of government that due to 2G telephone rates have come down. He sais that 2G service is not even rolled out the fall in price is due to what was due to what was done previously.
Nageswar Rao told that high GDP should be seen along with inflation. It should be seen how the trend in other countries are. he took up the topic of raising procurement price by two times. He todl that it should be seen with raise input cost, which has risen by four time.
Mr Rao is very vocal and impressive.
1. One group who has suffered lot due to the independence of Bharat are the tribal group. He was very concern that there was no mention about them in speech of president.
2. In context of decreasing agricultural land he mentioned that Delhi is situated in most fertile land. It should have been in some barren land.
3. He told that getting pat from foreign country head is considered
Bishnu Prasad Ray of Andaman, raised topic of printing of excess currency. It seems government is printing 15% of GDP double of the USA
It seems there was not of value 10000 when independence was achieved. Government withdrew and kept only till 1000. Janata government withdrew currency value 1000. But again government has introduced 1000. It is helping corruption. He supported Swami Ramdev. I have heard Swami Ramdev talking about it.
Mr Thambiduarai raised another point that there is a trend of having centrally sponsored program. This is effecting federal structure of nation. Programs are announced by Delhi but it should be implemented by states. Then state depend on fund allotment by delhi there partiality at that time. centrally sponsored programs like MGNAREGA, a flagship program of UPA is giving rise to more corruption.
He tore into the the argument of government that due to 2G telephone rates have come down. He sais that 2G service is not even rolled out the fall in price is due to what was due to what was done previously.
Nageswar Rao told that high GDP should be seen along with inflation. It should be seen how the trend in other countries are. he took up the topic of raising procurement price by two times. He todl that it should be seen with raise input cost, which has risen by four time.
Mr Rao is very vocal and impressive.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Press meet of PM
Press meet was organized and PM has spoken. We will have dissection by different minds. There was a clear selection of media houses, which were carefully selected. Even questions were carefully positioned.
There were some general questions. And even to such general question there was not specific answer.
Let me go through my impression of skeptic.
Ajtak asked some question on background of 2G. His answers were very vague. He told that he thought that thinks were going right way. Then he said that did not think somebody will do wrong. He told that he was not aware of intention. To the question that people informed him about the wrong which was going on, he said there were different opinions so he could not decide.
Asianet asked about corruption in judiciary. There was nothing from PM which is worth thinking over.
I am not aware who the next channel was. They asked that policies are not going forwards due to people in opposition, governing party and even government. It was in answer to this that PM did blunder. He told that parliament was stalled due to opposition. This will certainly be raised further by different quarters. What came later was bigger blunder. He said that BJP is opposing us because we have caught one minister in Gujarat. People of Bharat were not aware of it. Reaction to this will be eagerly looked forward. People did not know that it was a political war. Now it will be up to BJP to clarify it further.
Then was Sardesai from IBN asking about fate of JPC, to which he told that he is not afraid of appearing before panel. After this he reiterated that he himself offered to appear before JPC. When Mr. Sardesai insisted about JPC then he affirmed. In the next part in which he was asked if he wants to give up, apart from usual coalition excuse he said that he has unfinished agenda. That agenda was never made clear. If, what has appeared till now was part of agenda then we can imagine what is in store till now. It would be better to clarify which all were parts of agenda and which were not. This will make it clear what is the agenda.
Next was a correspondent from Al-Za-Jeera. Initially it was told that there are some international media invited so it became clear that what was meant by that. She asked opinion regarding recent Egypt revolution and changes. He responded that he welcomes wishes of people. It was most diplomatic answer but not touching the facts. I had hear that our government had conferred Nehru prize on Hosni Mubarak for good governance. So it would have been appropriate to accept that either people of Egypt are wrong or our government had gone wrong. But there was no word on that. The issue was not even elaborated beyond customary words, anything like the words of visionary which could befit a leader. It was of a silent observer, the usual nature of Dr. Man Mohan Singh.
Editor from DD who preferred to ask in Hindi and wanted to be more poetic and told a couplet, which went like this
गिरते वो है जो सीधे हो कर चलते हैं,
वो क्या जो घुटनों के बल रहते हैं|
These lines were potent with meaning but understanding could not be appreciated by PM. Lady went on to ask if there would be any action against the corrupt. And what did she expect the answer to be. PM responded in very general terms that corrupt will be punished. No modalities no more details. Is that what is expected from PM.
Then came ETV`s chance. They raised Telanagana issue. To that only thing PM could respond was that he is studying and consultations going on. There was nothing concrete.
Then came turn of a Kolkata media group. He started with mention of corruption price rise and finally he raised relation with left. PM chose not o talk about previous two topics and responded to the third which said that left is no more in coalition so there will not be any understanding with them. I wondered why such a question was asked from him as he is not at all in the position to take decisions.
Then came CNBC Awaz. They were concerned about financial and economic situation so they enquired about long term funds. This was the area where PM is expert and I am not aware of technicalities. PM talked of corporatization of debt market and something similar. Then there was talk of agricultural reform. It was reminded that he himself was involved it in when he was finance minister in PV Narsimha Rao`s ministry.. To that PM responded that there is some policy regarding marketing system but this falls with state government so they have to take action. As usual somebody else is responsible and he cannot do anything.
NDTV had chance and the editor, Mr. Roy told that PM is facing double incumbency from opposition and even from his own party, in case of election, and how does he plan to overcome it. In reply PM said that he has longtime to complete his term. Then Mr. Roy used a word which is often used for PM. He said how he wants to overcome the blame of being lame duck PM and government. He again said about coalition compulsions then he added that he will reshuffle his cabinet after budget session. That will be the sign of his power we still have to see how powerful he will be. We have to see how he will overcome two barriers. Will he be sacrificed to keep his party in power? Future will answer it.
The opportunity given to channel News 24 was wasted.
Then came another news channel, name of which I could not follow. He raised pertinent question of food inflation which is affecting poor. To this PM responded that there is PDS and MGNAREGA to take care of poor. So what does it mean inflation will not be controlled. We know how effect is PDS system and how much MGNAREGA is able to elevate the poor from poverty.
Then there was some North East channel. He told is there going to be time bound strategy for controlling ULFA or it will be open ended talk like NSCM. This was very pregnant with meaning but it was not realized and simply it was responded that government is talking.
Upendra Rai of Sahara News asked about abolishing discretionary quota. In reply to that PM could only tell that he was thinking. Thought it was not very hot in media it was indeed very important to bring out some long term probity in political sphere. There would not have been any visible opposition to such a measure for the fear of backlash by the people but even on such measure PM was not serious even on that. Even his words did not show any such intention. The editor also pointed out decrease in FDI to which PM told that the source of FDI, rich nations are in bad financial condition. So FDI flow has decreased. He said that for FDI there are two factors internal and external. Since external factors are not conducive he cannot do much. He forgot that he was not supposed to speak for the external factors but tell about the internal factor which is under his control but he did not elaborate
Editor of Star News asked about the moral responsibility of corruption to which PM said that there are coalition compromises. This is bound to raise questions. PM chose to shift the responsibility of corruption on coalition. That will raise further question like. Who is responsible the coalition partner or the relation itself if not the main party of coalition i.e. Congress. In the supplementary question it was asked if the position is as per his temperament. He said that it is learning experience. I wondered if position of PM is to give learning experience for which whole nation is laboratory and people its guinea pig.
Arnab Goswami of Times Now took up next. He asked about ISRO deal and enquired if there was any backroom deal. In response to that PM took help of written transcript. He read out. This happens when one does not want to do some mistake or when there is chance of doing mistake. PM read out dispassionately. Previous day I had got to know that there was lot of communication between PMO and ISRO officials. So PM was expecting this and had prepared well so to say that he was careful. For the back room talk he said that there was no back room talk. He did say that he discussed with US official but not with Germans. This left many question unanswered. What was meant by backroom talk in official parlance? Everyone is aware that there is lot of backroom talk which goes on. Just in answer to such question such detail will not be given. It appeared that PM was hiding more than revealing by reading out such written reasons. Mr Goswami wanted to ask about the statement of Mr Sibal`s logic of zero loss. To this there was interruption by the advisor of PM that it was not interrogation of PM. PM intervened and wanted to answer. He told that loss depend on reference. It indicated that everyone is right. He did not want to be seen as siding with Sibal but he did not want to be opposing him. This was only indication of him being politician. But this was the opportunity to prove him as statement but he rather chose to be identified as politician.
Sun TV editor enquired about the fisherman problem with Srilanka. To which he just said that he is talking.
BBC raised a issue which was related to UK. They asked why there should be aid to Bharat when UK itself is having difficult time. To this PM told that Bharat is still poor country and needs help but at the same time he reiterated that Bharat will not collapse if aid does not arrive. This will not be discussed much in national media but will be observed keenly in UK. There has been some discussion in UK to stop aids to Bharat who is growing at rate of 8% much despised by even UK and Bharat is also seen to be aiding African countries.
Last but punch line was delivered b the editor of Zee News. He asked series of question. They were very pertinent and should have been raised by other editors but looks like others failed to realize the potential among those questions. He asked why was this conference called which was not addressed till then. What did PM mean by dead serious about issues? What is progress on Lokpal bill? What is progress on black money? What is about state funding of election? And finally he asked would PM accept his mistake. PM who could answer one question till then could answer so many. He just responded that he is trying on black issue. And with that it ended.
There were some questions again about 2G from various editors. It was at this time PM did his biggest blunder. He told that those who are claiming there due to 2G policy there was some loss then he would like to say that government incurs even greater loss in various subsidy. And the loss which is shown by profit gained by the company is not loss but business model. He was referring to purchase of spectrum by few company and selling it at multifold price to others. He told that there are two ways of getting fund one is by borrowing and another is by selling stake and what company had done is justified. So in these two statements PM raised two issues which will be discussed in detail. One that is spectrum sale was comparable to subsidy and he was in support of the companies who sold stakes of their company.
It will be very interesting to know the response of different quarters to this.
There were some general questions. And even to such general question there was not specific answer.
Let me go through my impression of skeptic.
Ajtak asked some question on background of 2G. His answers were very vague. He told that he thought that thinks were going right way. Then he said that did not think somebody will do wrong. He told that he was not aware of intention. To the question that people informed him about the wrong which was going on, he said there were different opinions so he could not decide.
Asianet asked about corruption in judiciary. There was nothing from PM which is worth thinking over.
I am not aware who the next channel was. They asked that policies are not going forwards due to people in opposition, governing party and even government. It was in answer to this that PM did blunder. He told that parliament was stalled due to opposition. This will certainly be raised further by different quarters. What came later was bigger blunder. He said that BJP is opposing us because we have caught one minister in Gujarat. People of Bharat were not aware of it. Reaction to this will be eagerly looked forward. People did not know that it was a political war. Now it will be up to BJP to clarify it further.
Then was Sardesai from IBN asking about fate of JPC, to which he told that he is not afraid of appearing before panel. After this he reiterated that he himself offered to appear before JPC. When Mr. Sardesai insisted about JPC then he affirmed. In the next part in which he was asked if he wants to give up, apart from usual coalition excuse he said that he has unfinished agenda. That agenda was never made clear. If, what has appeared till now was part of agenda then we can imagine what is in store till now. It would be better to clarify which all were parts of agenda and which were not. This will make it clear what is the agenda.
Next was a correspondent from Al-Za-Jeera. Initially it was told that there are some international media invited so it became clear that what was meant by that. She asked opinion regarding recent Egypt revolution and changes. He responded that he welcomes wishes of people. It was most diplomatic answer but not touching the facts. I had hear that our government had conferred Nehru prize on Hosni Mubarak for good governance. So it would have been appropriate to accept that either people of Egypt are wrong or our government had gone wrong. But there was no word on that. The issue was not even elaborated beyond customary words, anything like the words of visionary which could befit a leader. It was of a silent observer, the usual nature of Dr. Man Mohan Singh.
Editor from DD who preferred to ask in Hindi and wanted to be more poetic and told a couplet, which went like this
गिरते वो है जो सीधे हो कर चलते हैं,
वो क्या जो घुटनों के बल रहते हैं|
These lines were potent with meaning but understanding could not be appreciated by PM. Lady went on to ask if there would be any action against the corrupt. And what did she expect the answer to be. PM responded in very general terms that corrupt will be punished. No modalities no more details. Is that what is expected from PM.
Then came ETV`s chance. They raised Telanagana issue. To that only thing PM could respond was that he is studying and consultations going on. There was nothing concrete.
Then came turn of a Kolkata media group. He started with mention of corruption price rise and finally he raised relation with left. PM chose not o talk about previous two topics and responded to the third which said that left is no more in coalition so there will not be any understanding with them. I wondered why such a question was asked from him as he is not at all in the position to take decisions.
Then came CNBC Awaz. They were concerned about financial and economic situation so they enquired about long term funds. This was the area where PM is expert and I am not aware of technicalities. PM talked of corporatization of debt market and something similar. Then there was talk of agricultural reform. It was reminded that he himself was involved it in when he was finance minister in PV Narsimha Rao`s ministry.. To that PM responded that there is some policy regarding marketing system but this falls with state government so they have to take action. As usual somebody else is responsible and he cannot do anything.
NDTV had chance and the editor, Mr. Roy told that PM is facing double incumbency from opposition and even from his own party, in case of election, and how does he plan to overcome it. In reply PM said that he has longtime to complete his term. Then Mr. Roy used a word which is often used for PM. He said how he wants to overcome the blame of being lame duck PM and government. He again said about coalition compulsions then he added that he will reshuffle his cabinet after budget session. That will be the sign of his power we still have to see how powerful he will be. We have to see how he will overcome two barriers. Will he be sacrificed to keep his party in power? Future will answer it.
The opportunity given to channel News 24 was wasted.
Then came another news channel, name of which I could not follow. He raised pertinent question of food inflation which is affecting poor. To this PM responded that there is PDS and MGNAREGA to take care of poor. So what does it mean inflation will not be controlled. We know how effect is PDS system and how much MGNAREGA is able to elevate the poor from poverty.
Then there was some North East channel. He told is there going to be time bound strategy for controlling ULFA or it will be open ended talk like NSCM. This was very pregnant with meaning but it was not realized and simply it was responded that government is talking.
Upendra Rai of Sahara News asked about abolishing discretionary quota. In reply to that PM could only tell that he was thinking. Thought it was not very hot in media it was indeed very important to bring out some long term probity in political sphere. There would not have been any visible opposition to such a measure for the fear of backlash by the people but even on such measure PM was not serious even on that. Even his words did not show any such intention. The editor also pointed out decrease in FDI to which PM told that the source of FDI, rich nations are in bad financial condition. So FDI flow has decreased. He said that for FDI there are two factors internal and external. Since external factors are not conducive he cannot do much. He forgot that he was not supposed to speak for the external factors but tell about the internal factor which is under his control but he did not elaborate
Editor of Star News asked about the moral responsibility of corruption to which PM said that there are coalition compromises. This is bound to raise questions. PM chose to shift the responsibility of corruption on coalition. That will raise further question like. Who is responsible the coalition partner or the relation itself if not the main party of coalition i.e. Congress. In the supplementary question it was asked if the position is as per his temperament. He said that it is learning experience. I wondered if position of PM is to give learning experience for which whole nation is laboratory and people its guinea pig.
Arnab Goswami of Times Now took up next. He asked about ISRO deal and enquired if there was any backroom deal. In response to that PM took help of written transcript. He read out. This happens when one does not want to do some mistake or when there is chance of doing mistake. PM read out dispassionately. Previous day I had got to know that there was lot of communication between PMO and ISRO officials. So PM was expecting this and had prepared well so to say that he was careful. For the back room talk he said that there was no back room talk. He did say that he discussed with US official but not with Germans. This left many question unanswered. What was meant by backroom talk in official parlance? Everyone is aware that there is lot of backroom talk which goes on. Just in answer to such question such detail will not be given. It appeared that PM was hiding more than revealing by reading out such written reasons. Mr Goswami wanted to ask about the statement of Mr Sibal`s logic of zero loss. To this there was interruption by the advisor of PM that it was not interrogation of PM. PM intervened and wanted to answer. He told that loss depend on reference. It indicated that everyone is right. He did not want to be seen as siding with Sibal but he did not want to be opposing him. This was only indication of him being politician. But this was the opportunity to prove him as statement but he rather chose to be identified as politician.
Sun TV editor enquired about the fisherman problem with Srilanka. To which he just said that he is talking.
BBC raised a issue which was related to UK. They asked why there should be aid to Bharat when UK itself is having difficult time. To this PM told that Bharat is still poor country and needs help but at the same time he reiterated that Bharat will not collapse if aid does not arrive. This will not be discussed much in national media but will be observed keenly in UK. There has been some discussion in UK to stop aids to Bharat who is growing at rate of 8% much despised by even UK and Bharat is also seen to be aiding African countries.
Last but punch line was delivered b the editor of Zee News. He asked series of question. They were very pertinent and should have been raised by other editors but looks like others failed to realize the potential among those questions. He asked why was this conference called which was not addressed till then. What did PM mean by dead serious about issues? What is progress on Lokpal bill? What is progress on black money? What is about state funding of election? And finally he asked would PM accept his mistake. PM who could answer one question till then could answer so many. He just responded that he is trying on black issue. And with that it ended.
There were some questions again about 2G from various editors. It was at this time PM did his biggest blunder. He told that those who are claiming there due to 2G policy there was some loss then he would like to say that government incurs even greater loss in various subsidy. And the loss which is shown by profit gained by the company is not loss but business model. He was referring to purchase of spectrum by few company and selling it at multifold price to others. He told that there are two ways of getting fund one is by borrowing and another is by selling stake and what company had done is justified. So in these two statements PM raised two issues which will be discussed in detail. One that is spectrum sale was comparable to subsidy and he was in support of the companies who sold stakes of their company.
It will be very interesting to know the response of different quarters to this.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Populist measure and Countries future
There was an interview with Mr Arun Shourie. A journalist whose words have never let me down with my thinking. he represents very analytical mind and does not mind calling spade a spade. This has made him friends as well as enemy. He keeps his right to praise opposition across ideologies. He is in limelight due to Spectrum scam. It was thought by present law minister that if he shows Mr Arun Shaurie in poor light then the lime light from him will be shifted. He forgot that Mr Shourie is not in hiding and does not want to hide anything. He is swayam prakash or self effulgent personality due to clarity of thought and integrity. The bad move by Mr Sibal is going to land in more trouble. He thought of spitting at sky forgetting that such an action is going to make his own face dirty. so there had been some interviews in different media for getting version of Mr Shourie. Very hard hitting interview came out in IBN's Devil's advocate program.
There at two points Mr Shourie levels allegations against Hindustan Times and Mr Sibal and dares then to take to court if he is wrong. That show the strength he carries. While people try to run away from investigation he called up CBI to investigate. That shows power of conviction. To point to the wrong may be important but is a person only does that all the time there is chance of one getting in to negative mindset. One should be able to offer constructive suggestions too. And here comes the power of Mr Shourie. in his various articles he has not minced words in offering solution. I categorically remember his article in Indian express about the situation of nation. He took analogy of a tree being eaten away by pest from within. In that article he told that Pakistan does not need to put so much of effort in trying to destabilize Bharat through Kashmir. All it need is to airdrop gun in Bihar and people will do the rest. It was the time when Bihar was ruled by Lalu and family. Bihar has seen some wind of change but what Mr Shourie told also coming true. It is alleged that Pakistan is providing arms to various groups in Maoist effected areas Bharat is being destabilized by its own people. Mr Shouries Prophetic words are coming true.
Today was another day to be illumined by him. An inteview appeared again in IE. That was mainly focused on spectrum scam, going back in details of what happened but the later part was on positive note about future i would like to reproduce them here.
Shefalee Vasudev: Everything seems to be falling apart--civil society and the state. If you had to start a clean-up process, would you start with judicial reforms?
Arun Shourie: When such situations arise, think of Gandhiji’s phrase: anything, anyone, anywhere, anytime. We should not think of just judicial reforms, police reforms or qualifications for legislators. Many people are now feeling that the situation is ripe for another people’s movement. Political parties feel they don’t have the credibility at the moment, they have to find some non-political faces to start the process. You can guess the names they are gravitating towards--APJ Abul Kalam is one and three former chief justices of India. People feel the situation is ripening for a people's movement--the government is being buffeted, it will continue to flounder.
Another prophetic words coming out. Hope Bharat is listening. That is at the national level. But what a person can do. Here comes guidance for the young man in the question posed to him.
Ravish Tiwari: In the name of social expenditure, we are spending Rs 30,000 crore on NGREGS while the allocation for rural roads is only Rs 10,000 crore in the budget. Similarly, you are coming out with food security rather than creating infrastructure for storage. So how are these things going to play out for the future of the country?
Arun Shourie: Only educated people who are not going to stand for elections can oppose this. Schemes like NREGS are like throwing money out of the window. Unless delivery measures are improved, all these populist measures are going to boomerang. I opposed this at that time to the great discomfiture of the masters in BJP. Populist measures are a main cause of the current inflation. People like Yashwant Sinha, who work in their constituencies, will tell you this is nothing but centralised corruption.
In this context I remember the effort by Yashwant Sinha as Finance minister. He had tried to bring some changes but due to populist pressure every time he had to roll back his policies. In one of the budget session he told that he had laboured more than what he had put for IAS test. He rolled back so many time that he became synonyms with rollback minister. So neither was the required reform neither Government could retain power. Mr Shourie's remark shows that Mr Yashwant Sinha is one who can deliver if given some support. I think Yashwant Sinha suffers from the similar problem as Mr Manmohan Singh. Of course by winning an loksabha election he proved himself to be better than Mr Singh. Being and administrator he does not know the manuvouring of politics. That is also difficult to believe becaus ehe has been in active politics for last several years. I was expecting Him to proove his calliber as CM of Jharkhand but he could not make it shows that he lacks something for that even his party does not tryust him for that purpose.
So much for mention of Yashwant Sinha. I will come to the most important part of thsi blog that is the suggestion to people.
Mr Shourie warns that the change which we want to see cannot be brought by the political parties. It has to brought by people who don't have political aspiration. Aligning too much with a political group corrupts the intention.
There at two points Mr Shourie levels allegations against Hindustan Times and Mr Sibal and dares then to take to court if he is wrong. That show the strength he carries. While people try to run away from investigation he called up CBI to investigate. That shows power of conviction. To point to the wrong may be important but is a person only does that all the time there is chance of one getting in to negative mindset. One should be able to offer constructive suggestions too. And here comes the power of Mr Shourie. in his various articles he has not minced words in offering solution. I categorically remember his article in Indian express about the situation of nation. He took analogy of a tree being eaten away by pest from within. In that article he told that Pakistan does not need to put so much of effort in trying to destabilize Bharat through Kashmir. All it need is to airdrop gun in Bihar and people will do the rest. It was the time when Bihar was ruled by Lalu and family. Bihar has seen some wind of change but what Mr Shourie told also coming true. It is alleged that Pakistan is providing arms to various groups in Maoist effected areas Bharat is being destabilized by its own people. Mr Shouries Prophetic words are coming true.
Today was another day to be illumined by him. An inteview appeared again in IE. That was mainly focused on spectrum scam, going back in details of what happened but the later part was on positive note about future i would like to reproduce them here.
Shefalee Vasudev: Everything seems to be falling apart--civil society and the state. If you had to start a clean-up process, would you start with judicial reforms?
Arun Shourie: When such situations arise, think of Gandhiji’s phrase: anything, anyone, anywhere, anytime. We should not think of just judicial reforms, police reforms or qualifications for legislators. Many people are now feeling that the situation is ripe for another people’s movement. Political parties feel they don’t have the credibility at the moment, they have to find some non-political faces to start the process. You can guess the names they are gravitating towards--APJ Abul Kalam is one and three former chief justices of India. People feel the situation is ripening for a people's movement--the government is being buffeted, it will continue to flounder.
Another prophetic words coming out. Hope Bharat is listening. That is at the national level. But what a person can do. Here comes guidance for the young man in the question posed to him.
Ravish Tiwari: In the name of social expenditure, we are spending Rs 30,000 crore on NGREGS while the allocation for rural roads is only Rs 10,000 crore in the budget. Similarly, you are coming out with food security rather than creating infrastructure for storage. So how are these things going to play out for the future of the country?
Arun Shourie: Only educated people who are not going to stand for elections can oppose this. Schemes like NREGS are like throwing money out of the window. Unless delivery measures are improved, all these populist measures are going to boomerang. I opposed this at that time to the great discomfiture of the masters in BJP. Populist measures are a main cause of the current inflation. People like Yashwant Sinha, who work in their constituencies, will tell you this is nothing but centralised corruption.
In this context I remember the effort by Yashwant Sinha as Finance minister. He had tried to bring some changes but due to populist pressure every time he had to roll back his policies. In one of the budget session he told that he had laboured more than what he had put for IAS test. He rolled back so many time that he became synonyms with rollback minister. So neither was the required reform neither Government could retain power. Mr Shourie's remark shows that Mr Yashwant Sinha is one who can deliver if given some support. I think Yashwant Sinha suffers from the similar problem as Mr Manmohan Singh. Of course by winning an loksabha election he proved himself to be better than Mr Singh. Being and administrator he does not know the manuvouring of politics. That is also difficult to believe becaus ehe has been in active politics for last several years. I was expecting Him to proove his calliber as CM of Jharkhand but he could not make it shows that he lacks something for that even his party does not tryust him for that purpose.
So much for mention of Yashwant Sinha. I will come to the most important part of thsi blog that is the suggestion to people.
Mr Shourie warns that the change which we want to see cannot be brought by the political parties. It has to brought by people who don't have political aspiration. Aligning too much with a political group corrupts the intention.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Amar Singh: Demeaning Politics
I came across this news. Looked like we have reached a tipping point. There was report in The Pioneer regarding him. It seems he has back tracked from his previous affidavit.
It waste of time to even write about him. he has touched the base. He should be outcasted from politics.
It waste of time to even write about him. he has touched the base. He should be outcasted from politics.
Criterias of Politician
Politician have three qualities
1. Policy
2. Inspiration
3. Implementation.
First and foremost every politician should have a certain policies. People who agree to similar policy should come under one umbrella of that set of policies. There are two groups who are clear with their policies in Indian politics. They are left wing and right wing. Others have opportunism as policy. They are more like cult, running round some personality, than a political group. Policy is right or wrong will be proved by logic and time. One example can be given that is of Shyama Prasad Mukharji. He advanced Integral humanism as his policy. He was not very successful during his lifetime but about half a century later his words are being followed by one of the largest group of the parliament.
Then, Politician should inspire other leaders to join his policy. This can be done by many ways. The best is to discuss and convince. One who follows this is the best politician. The best example for this must be Jayaprakash Narayan, who stood tallest among leaders at the time of emergency It could be seen when BJP formed government in Jharkhand with JMM because it was seen by many as impossible. Sadly we don’t see many employing the same. Unfortunately, such ways are used only for delaying an action. The best example for this can be seen in case of women quota. Second is to bribe. These bribes can either be monitory or favor. This has become more popular way. Recent example of this was displayed in case of nuclear deal. People told that money changed hands. BSP supported government to get favor in some cases pending with CBI. This is the stage for action of opposition to the policy to act.
Third is implementation. Here comes the honesty and integrity of the politician in charge. Here the energy of the politician is tested. One can be here on stage but they should also be hero in the field. To give high expectation and mobilize people is easy. To deliver is the test. Environment minister has been accused of showing missionary zeal but such zeal and not allowing other policies to go forward. It could rather be suggested that similar zeal is lacking in other ministry. It seems every ministry is having problem with him but it was Kamal Nath, ex-road and transport minister who faced policies of environment and took the road building ahead. One could see similar zeal in Khanduri, Road minister and Arun Shourie, Disinvestment minister in Vajpeyi government. At state level best example can be that of Narendra modi. Others who have made visible improvements can be Nitish in social policies, Raman in Naxal policies, Krishna and Naidu for IT policies. Their zeal is worth studying and replicating. One negative example should not go unnoticed and that is of Man Mohan Singh in nuclear policies. So much was invested in that. In fact that was only policy which he could stand for as his own child. So many of political equations were changed, to bring that policy. But we have not seen any result of that There is nothing new in nuclear front. Two recent news should be taken in consideration. One is Jaitapur project which is having hiccups and there was news that Pakistan has more atomic bombs than Bharat. Both news should better decorate dustbin.
One must be very watchful of acts of politician. Greater worry is, how many will qualify to be a politician.
1. Policy
2. Inspiration
3. Implementation.
First and foremost every politician should have a certain policies. People who agree to similar policy should come under one umbrella of that set of policies. There are two groups who are clear with their policies in Indian politics. They are left wing and right wing. Others have opportunism as policy. They are more like cult, running round some personality, than a political group. Policy is right or wrong will be proved by logic and time. One example can be given that is of Shyama Prasad Mukharji. He advanced Integral humanism as his policy. He was not very successful during his lifetime but about half a century later his words are being followed by one of the largest group of the parliament.
Then, Politician should inspire other leaders to join his policy. This can be done by many ways. The best is to discuss and convince. One who follows this is the best politician. The best example for this must be Jayaprakash Narayan, who stood tallest among leaders at the time of emergency It could be seen when BJP formed government in Jharkhand with JMM because it was seen by many as impossible. Sadly we don’t see many employing the same. Unfortunately, such ways are used only for delaying an action. The best example for this can be seen in case of women quota. Second is to bribe. These bribes can either be monitory or favor. This has become more popular way. Recent example of this was displayed in case of nuclear deal. People told that money changed hands. BSP supported government to get favor in some cases pending with CBI. This is the stage for action of opposition to the policy to act.
Third is implementation. Here comes the honesty and integrity of the politician in charge. Here the energy of the politician is tested. One can be here on stage but they should also be hero in the field. To give high expectation and mobilize people is easy. To deliver is the test. Environment minister has been accused of showing missionary zeal but such zeal and not allowing other policies to go forward. It could rather be suggested that similar zeal is lacking in other ministry. It seems every ministry is having problem with him but it was Kamal Nath, ex-road and transport minister who faced policies of environment and took the road building ahead. One could see similar zeal in Khanduri, Road minister and Arun Shourie, Disinvestment minister in Vajpeyi government. At state level best example can be that of Narendra modi. Others who have made visible improvements can be Nitish in social policies, Raman in Naxal policies, Krishna and Naidu for IT policies. Their zeal is worth studying and replicating. One negative example should not go unnoticed and that is of Man Mohan Singh in nuclear policies. So much was invested in that. In fact that was only policy which he could stand for as his own child. So many of political equations were changed, to bring that policy. But we have not seen any result of that There is nothing new in nuclear front. Two recent news should be taken in consideration. One is Jaitapur project which is having hiccups and there was news that Pakistan has more atomic bombs than Bharat. Both news should better decorate dustbin.
One must be very watchful of acts of politician. Greater worry is, how many will qualify to be a politician.
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Why we missed the Arab pulse: A response
To the article in The Pioneer by Manavenra Singh
Topic: Silence is never a policy
Text:Very true, for those who are in saddle and under oath of protection of Dharma must have opinion. Opinion, may be right or wrong, will be tested by logic or by the time. But only escapist will keep silence as policy. That is to run away from scrutiny. They are like jackals who wait for the war to get over to feast on the dead. They can never be leader. Bharat was leader for ages because it had a policy; tested by logic and time declared wise as fine. Such a nation cannot be silent.
Topic: Silence is never a policy
Text:Very true, for those who are in saddle and under oath of protection of Dharma must have opinion. Opinion, may be right or wrong, will be tested by logic or by the time. But only escapist will keep silence as policy. That is to run away from scrutiny. They are like jackals who wait for the war to get over to feast on the dead. They can never be leader. Bharat was leader for ages because it had a policy; tested by logic and time declared wise as fine. Such a nation cannot be silent.
Silence is Never a Policy
This man Manvendra Singh should be admired for his choice of words; so prominent with meaning. I have written about him in my earlier post. I was attracted by another sentence in the same article. It went as the topic says Silence is never policy. Though it has been said in a different context, I am tempted to extend the meaning. In present days, we have been witnessing many scams being surfaced. Since they are at the door step of government, it was very apt for the PM to respond to them. To the surprise of every thinking men, there is stoic silence maintained by him. Everyone knows who the de facto ruler of the nation is at present. Mincing no word it can be asked, the super PM, as she has been told by many quarters, Sonia Gandhi should have spoken a word at least. They have some people taking part in TV talk shows. To say over all they have been very disappointing. It appears, congress has only two strategies in their hand. First, they point to the precedence of the wrong doing and second one to keep silence.
The first method tends to show that one wrong justifies other. It was shown in Shivraj Patil’s report on 2G scam that there was wrong allegation ascribed on the opposition. That shows that government is trying to hide behind an imaginary wall rather than face the problem. This to some how is better than second option. This allows debate to continue and facts to get revealed. The second one, the option of silence, is more harmful. It leaves every one to speculate. Now this is being followed as policy. So this should be further dissected. There are few reasons for silence..
1) Being optimistic, there is no wrong doing but leader does not know how to articulate and discuss. It was once accepted by Jayanti Natarajan, spokesperson of Congress, in a TV talk show, that Man Mohan Singh is man of action and not of word. It was like saying that PM does not know how to speak. That is so typical of a bureaucrat, to act. We must know how the bureaucrats act. They act as per the command of leader. They are responsible for implementation and not for the policy. They have been trained for this. This is the reason that even when the governing parties change they continue to be in the positions. They do this continuously and the best among them do it the best way and nothing more. Man Mohan Singh has been hailed for economic reforms. That was a policy. So a politician should be responsible for that. Since he is nota politician so it should not be ascribed to him. That was wrong attributed ascribed to him.
2) The second option is very dangerous what if there is wrong doing and then silence is to protect the same. The silence is like a invisible and non existing wall to save from the impeding disaster. If such option is exercised by a non state actor then it is not of great concern. Either he can be of no consequence or he can punished. But even imagination of such option being exercised by the state is horrific. Bharat is not only a nation like any other nation. We represent a culture, a thought. We cannot let down such a tradition by our negligence. Silence can never be policy of state. If king becomes silent, intelligentsia should take the lead. If that too fail then there will be chaos because at the next level is the money power which can easily corrupt a gullible but so proclaimed innocent mind. We can see such option being exercised by dictators. But such power is never stable and it is shown that they are uprooted sooner or later by a mob fury (very visible in present days).
Finally we cannot remain silent.
The first method tends to show that one wrong justifies other. It was shown in Shivraj Patil’s report on 2G scam that there was wrong allegation ascribed on the opposition. That shows that government is trying to hide behind an imaginary wall rather than face the problem. This to some how is better than second option. This allows debate to continue and facts to get revealed. The second one, the option of silence, is more harmful. It leaves every one to speculate. Now this is being followed as policy. So this should be further dissected. There are few reasons for silence..
1) Being optimistic, there is no wrong doing but leader does not know how to articulate and discuss. It was once accepted by Jayanti Natarajan, spokesperson of Congress, in a TV talk show, that Man Mohan Singh is man of action and not of word. It was like saying that PM does not know how to speak. That is so typical of a bureaucrat, to act. We must know how the bureaucrats act. They act as per the command of leader. They are responsible for implementation and not for the policy. They have been trained for this. This is the reason that even when the governing parties change they continue to be in the positions. They do this continuously and the best among them do it the best way and nothing more. Man Mohan Singh has been hailed for economic reforms. That was a policy. So a politician should be responsible for that. Since he is nota politician so it should not be ascribed to him. That was wrong attributed ascribed to him.
2) The second option is very dangerous what if there is wrong doing and then silence is to protect the same. The silence is like a invisible and non existing wall to save from the impeding disaster. If such option is exercised by a non state actor then it is not of great concern. Either he can be of no consequence or he can punished. But even imagination of such option being exercised by the state is horrific. Bharat is not only a nation like any other nation. We represent a culture, a thought. We cannot let down such a tradition by our negligence. Silence can never be policy of state. If king becomes silent, intelligentsia should take the lead. If that too fail then there will be chaos because at the next level is the money power which can easily corrupt a gullible but so proclaimed innocent mind. We can see such option being exercised by dictators. But such power is never stable and it is shown that they are uprooted sooner or later by a mob fury (very visible in present days).
Finally we cannot remain silent.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Shifting Blame
There was a column by Sri Joginder Singh, ex CBI chief, regarding black money.
http://dailypioneer.com/DisplayContent.aspx?ContentID=315879&URLName=Stashing-away-the-loot
I have watched him coming on some of the talk shows. He is in possession lot of information and developed great analytical skill to make meaning of them. He has shown to be the best among the the CBI chief we have got. He seems to have put effort but results were not seen.
He claims that he was instrumental in bringing Bofors scam related documents. With that he ended his job. Now he tells that CBI is puppet in hands of politicians. His words are so uninspiring or even demotivating. To cry about the system is very easy. It is much easy to suggest some remedies and not be the part of it. The words is to not recognize the obvious and pass the blame to others.
Due to this I commented on that column. I doubt this will be allowed to publish.
It has become fashion to shift all the blame on political class. We forget that they are not independent. The sin has to be shared by bureaucrats and judiciary. We should not pass responsibility to Media because till now they have failed to show an independent standing. With all due respect to Sri Joginder Singh, it can be said that even honest were not honest enough to counter dishonests.
http://dailypioneer.com/DisplayContent.aspx?ContentID=315879&URLName=Stashing-away-the-loot
I have watched him coming on some of the talk shows. He is in possession lot of information and developed great analytical skill to make meaning of them. He has shown to be the best among the the CBI chief we have got. He seems to have put effort but results were not seen.
He claims that he was instrumental in bringing Bofors scam related documents. With that he ended his job. Now he tells that CBI is puppet in hands of politicians. His words are so uninspiring or even demotivating. To cry about the system is very easy. It is much easy to suggest some remedies and not be the part of it. The words is to not recognize the obvious and pass the blame to others.
Due to this I commented on that column. I doubt this will be allowed to publish.
It has become fashion to shift all the blame on political class. We forget that they are not independent. The sin has to be shared by bureaucrats and judiciary. We should not pass responsibility to Media because till now they have failed to show an independent standing. With all due respect to Sri Joginder Singh, it can be said that even honest were not honest enough to counter dishonests.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Paid News
Very nice article in The Hindu, Which I picked up from Media Watch blog.
The year 2010 saw journalists, their associations and unions hold more conferences and seminars on one professional issue than any other. And it wasn't on the Wage Board or the Radia tapes. Hundreds of journalists across the country attended these meetings. Dozens stood up and spoke of their own experiences of the subject. Of how it demoralised them and ruined their profession.
Yet, the main topic of their discussion found no mention in the very newspapers, magazines or television channels they work for. Sometimes, the fact of the meeting being held, perhaps as an event attended by a High Court judge, was reported. But the subject discussed was not. In newspapers and TV channels, choking with stories on corruption, this is the one story you are the least likely to see. The media are their own worst censors when it comes to reporting on ‘Paid News.'
Just before the 2009 Assembly elections in Maharashtra, a large newspaper group in the State brought its editors together for a meeting in Pune. A lively discussion ensued on who would win the elections and the extent to which money power would play a role. Generally, it was agreed, winning a seat in the State legislature would cost Rs. 3 crore to Rs. 5 crore. (That was a huge underestimate, given the expenditures that actually followed.) With 288 seats in the Maharashtra legislature, a party had to win at least 145 in order to rule. This meant an expenditure of between Rs. 435 crore and Rs. 725 crore by the party or front that triumphed. On just the winning candidates.
The editors discussed a few known names of those who had that kind of money power. At this point, the daily's financial managers spoke up. If there's that kind of money being spent, said the cash-box boys, we should get a decent share of it. What, after all, is election expenditure but campaign and propaganda expenses? Detailed plans for ‘pay-to-print' were soon under way in one of the biggest media groups in the State.
Other groups were already ahead of them. A couple of them had already gained on this front during the parliamentary polls. The taste of success in that round had whetted their appetites.
Maharashtra, after all, sees more money than any other State being spent on worse things. Some media groups set themselves targets of 20 to 30 per cent of what they perceived would be the money splurged by the major candidates. Some even assigned cash targets to their different branches. This did not mean forgoing money from the defeated contestants or even the ‘other side' or front. It simply meant that you targeted a lower level of recovery from them. Losing candidates, alas, don't pay up.
Paid news comes in many packages: pre-paid, post-paid and yet-to-be-paid, for instance. There are also deluxe tariffs and aam aadmi tariffs, the former in crores, the latter in lakhs. Sadly, these media groups met, even exceeded, their targets.
But it's not just during elections that paid news or its Euclidian variants occur. The crazy saturation coverage of Davos in some channels was not caused by breathless public interest or media curiosity. It had a lot to do with ‘partnerships' and corporate subsidies the public can't see, and won't be allowed to see. Some channels sent out ‘rules' to their journalists of things that just had to be done. Rules with no particular journalistic rationale at all.
Now we have yet another Group of Ministers, yes, one more, to deal with Paid News. Has the Prime Minister reviewed its composition? It could end up hugely embarrassing to have a member of the GoM whose family owns a major newspaper that could be affected by any inquiry. Or another who, it might turn out, has represented corporate media groups in the past as a lawyer.
“Any news or writing appearing in a media (print or electronic) for a price in cash or kind in consideration” — that is how the Press Council of India (PCI) defined ‘paid news' last year. A lot of this, of course, boils down to advertising disguised as news coverage. In the 2009 elections, powerful media groups connived at the violation of spending limits in the polls by rich candidates and parties. Paid news did more damage to the media's coverage of those polls than any other factor. (Meanwhile, the odium the media earned themselves in the 2009 polls and after, saw this year's Padma awards giving journalism a wide berth. Less Padma, More Lakshmi?)
It is a scam worth more millions than anyone can accurately estimate. Most other institutions of Indian democracy and regulatory structures have tried doing something about it. But in the free media, there was a costly silence. Consider this: the Election Commission of India (ECI) has tried hard to curb the menace with a strong crackdown that actually saw candidates in the recent Bihar elections pulled up in over 87 instances of ‘paid news.' The ECI has also drawn up new guidelines and rules to help its officers spot and stamp out what is essentially a media management-driven racket. It now has a special division dealing with money power and paid news. And it has taken up a major case: of former Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan's huge media blitz during the 2009 election campaign.
Almost nothing of this has been reported in the media, barring The Hindu and a couple of other publications. The hearings in the Chavan case have been fascinating too — with near-zero coverage. The ECI, normally treated with great respect by the media, has seen many of its initiatives on the ‘paid news' front simply being blanked out. So the public gets to know very little about how alive the ‘paid news' issue is. Will the case get bogged down in challenges of jurisdiction and in the courts, or will we see a decisive result, given the firmness of this ECI? As news, or as an issue, it ought to fascinate the media. But there is silence because, while Mr. Chavan stands accused, it is the media who are on trial.
Or take Parliament. It saw an astonishing consensus on this subject. The issue came up through a vital calling attention motion moved by Sitaram Yechury of the CPI(M), a clinical dissection of the problem by Arun Jaitley of the BJP, and with members from all parties in total agreement that ‘paid news' was disastrous for democracy. Across the spectrum, MPs demanded an end to the practice. Not a word on this Parliament debate appeared in most of the media. Much earlier, the country's Vice-President had detailed the ‘double jeopardy' that paid news placed Indian democracy in. One, it wrecked the concept of a fair and free press. Two, it undermined the democratic electoral process of the nation. Later, President Pratibha Patil voiced her concern over the damage this was doing to free media.
Or look at the Securities and Exchange Board of India. SEBI was disturbed by what ‘private treaties' between the media and private corporations were doing to news. (These ‘treaties' opened the floodgates for paid news.) It felt that such backdoor deals where corporates pay media companies in shares for advertising, plus other favourable coverage, could mislead investors. They “may give rise to conflicts of interest and may, therefore, result in dilution of the independence of the press vis-à-vis the nature and content of the news/editorials in the media ...” SEBI, therefore, got the PCI to make mandatory the disclosure of any such links. It sought to ensure that such disclosure would have to be made in any “news report/article/editorial in newspapers/television relating to the company in which the media group holds such stake.” Following this, one of our largest dailies carried a tiny line below a piece linked to the Lavasa private city project in which it admitted to having a minor stake. In the kind of font size that had Sherlock Holmes reading newspapers with a magnifying glass.
The PCI set up a two-member sub-committee, which produced a devastating 71-page report on Paid News (see The Hindu, April 22 and August 5, 2010). Buckling under pressure from powerful media owners, the PCI then betrayed its own ideals and the public by suppressing its report. However, that report is freely available online, even if banished from the PCI's website.
So the ECI, Parliament, SEBI and top political leaders have all contributed to the fight against the slaughter of honest journalism. Even the spineless PCI did so, before deserting ship. But in the media there is near-total silence. True, there are the exceptions. And the fact that all those journalists went public at those meetings shows how deep their resentment runs. But institutionally, the media's failure is huge and, if not reversed, will extract a terrible price. The corporate media have censored the Paid News story, browbeaten their own journalists and cheated the public of information it has every right and need to know.
The year 2010 saw journalists, their associations and unions hold more conferences and seminars on one professional issue than any other. And it wasn't on the Wage Board or the Radia tapes. Hundreds of journalists across the country attended these meetings. Dozens stood up and spoke of their own experiences of the subject. Of how it demoralised them and ruined their profession.
Yet, the main topic of their discussion found no mention in the very newspapers, magazines or television channels they work for. Sometimes, the fact of the meeting being held, perhaps as an event attended by a High Court judge, was reported. But the subject discussed was not. In newspapers and TV channels, choking with stories on corruption, this is the one story you are the least likely to see. The media are their own worst censors when it comes to reporting on ‘Paid News.'
Just before the 2009 Assembly elections in Maharashtra, a large newspaper group in the State brought its editors together for a meeting in Pune. A lively discussion ensued on who would win the elections and the extent to which money power would play a role. Generally, it was agreed, winning a seat in the State legislature would cost Rs. 3 crore to Rs. 5 crore. (That was a huge underestimate, given the expenditures that actually followed.) With 288 seats in the Maharashtra legislature, a party had to win at least 145 in order to rule. This meant an expenditure of between Rs. 435 crore and Rs. 725 crore by the party or front that triumphed. On just the winning candidates.
The editors discussed a few known names of those who had that kind of money power. At this point, the daily's financial managers spoke up. If there's that kind of money being spent, said the cash-box boys, we should get a decent share of it. What, after all, is election expenditure but campaign and propaganda expenses? Detailed plans for ‘pay-to-print' were soon under way in one of the biggest media groups in the State.
Other groups were already ahead of them. A couple of them had already gained on this front during the parliamentary polls. The taste of success in that round had whetted their appetites.
Maharashtra, after all, sees more money than any other State being spent on worse things. Some media groups set themselves targets of 20 to 30 per cent of what they perceived would be the money splurged by the major candidates. Some even assigned cash targets to their different branches. This did not mean forgoing money from the defeated contestants or even the ‘other side' or front. It simply meant that you targeted a lower level of recovery from them. Losing candidates, alas, don't pay up.
Paid news comes in many packages: pre-paid, post-paid and yet-to-be-paid, for instance. There are also deluxe tariffs and aam aadmi tariffs, the former in crores, the latter in lakhs. Sadly, these media groups met, even exceeded, their targets.
But it's not just during elections that paid news or its Euclidian variants occur. The crazy saturation coverage of Davos in some channels was not caused by breathless public interest or media curiosity. It had a lot to do with ‘partnerships' and corporate subsidies the public can't see, and won't be allowed to see. Some channels sent out ‘rules' to their journalists of things that just had to be done. Rules with no particular journalistic rationale at all.
Now we have yet another Group of Ministers, yes, one more, to deal with Paid News. Has the Prime Minister reviewed its composition? It could end up hugely embarrassing to have a member of the GoM whose family owns a major newspaper that could be affected by any inquiry. Or another who, it might turn out, has represented corporate media groups in the past as a lawyer.
“Any news or writing appearing in a media (print or electronic) for a price in cash or kind in consideration” — that is how the Press Council of India (PCI) defined ‘paid news' last year. A lot of this, of course, boils down to advertising disguised as news coverage. In the 2009 elections, powerful media groups connived at the violation of spending limits in the polls by rich candidates and parties. Paid news did more damage to the media's coverage of those polls than any other factor. (Meanwhile, the odium the media earned themselves in the 2009 polls and after, saw this year's Padma awards giving journalism a wide berth. Less Padma, More Lakshmi?)
It is a scam worth more millions than anyone can accurately estimate. Most other institutions of Indian democracy and regulatory structures have tried doing something about it. But in the free media, there was a costly silence. Consider this: the Election Commission of India (ECI) has tried hard to curb the menace with a strong crackdown that actually saw candidates in the recent Bihar elections pulled up in over 87 instances of ‘paid news.' The ECI has also drawn up new guidelines and rules to help its officers spot and stamp out what is essentially a media management-driven racket. It now has a special division dealing with money power and paid news. And it has taken up a major case: of former Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan's huge media blitz during the 2009 election campaign.
Almost nothing of this has been reported in the media, barring The Hindu and a couple of other publications. The hearings in the Chavan case have been fascinating too — with near-zero coverage. The ECI, normally treated with great respect by the media, has seen many of its initiatives on the ‘paid news' front simply being blanked out. So the public gets to know very little about how alive the ‘paid news' issue is. Will the case get bogged down in challenges of jurisdiction and in the courts, or will we see a decisive result, given the firmness of this ECI? As news, or as an issue, it ought to fascinate the media. But there is silence because, while Mr. Chavan stands accused, it is the media who are on trial.
Or take Parliament. It saw an astonishing consensus on this subject. The issue came up through a vital calling attention motion moved by Sitaram Yechury of the CPI(M), a clinical dissection of the problem by Arun Jaitley of the BJP, and with members from all parties in total agreement that ‘paid news' was disastrous for democracy. Across the spectrum, MPs demanded an end to the practice. Not a word on this Parliament debate appeared in most of the media. Much earlier, the country's Vice-President had detailed the ‘double jeopardy' that paid news placed Indian democracy in. One, it wrecked the concept of a fair and free press. Two, it undermined the democratic electoral process of the nation. Later, President Pratibha Patil voiced her concern over the damage this was doing to free media.
Or look at the Securities and Exchange Board of India. SEBI was disturbed by what ‘private treaties' between the media and private corporations were doing to news. (These ‘treaties' opened the floodgates for paid news.) It felt that such backdoor deals where corporates pay media companies in shares for advertising, plus other favourable coverage, could mislead investors. They “may give rise to conflicts of interest and may, therefore, result in dilution of the independence of the press vis-à-vis the nature and content of the news/editorials in the media ...” SEBI, therefore, got the PCI to make mandatory the disclosure of any such links. It sought to ensure that such disclosure would have to be made in any “news report/article/editorial in newspapers/television relating to the company in which the media group holds such stake.” Following this, one of our largest dailies carried a tiny line below a piece linked to the Lavasa private city project in which it admitted to having a minor stake. In the kind of font size that had Sherlock Holmes reading newspapers with a magnifying glass.
The PCI set up a two-member sub-committee, which produced a devastating 71-page report on Paid News (see The Hindu, April 22 and August 5, 2010). Buckling under pressure from powerful media owners, the PCI then betrayed its own ideals and the public by suppressing its report. However, that report is freely available online, even if banished from the PCI's website.
So the ECI, Parliament, SEBI and top political leaders have all contributed to the fight against the slaughter of honest journalism. Even the spineless PCI did so, before deserting ship. But in the media there is near-total silence. True, there are the exceptions. And the fact that all those journalists went public at those meetings shows how deep their resentment runs. But institutionally, the media's failure is huge and, if not reversed, will extract a terrible price. The corporate media have censored the Paid News story, browbeaten their own journalists and cheated the public of information it has every right and need to know.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Saint Sonia Gandhi
There was news in Daily Pioneer regarding speech by Sonia Gandhi
http://dailypioneer.com/315264/Pious-words-of-rectitude.html
It had two points mentioned
1. She saw virtue in Mr Hooda`s retirement at age of 64.
2. She mentioned Greed is not good.
One does not have to comment on the second statement. still something can be told for the first one.
Politicians do not have to fight a war. As long as they are mentally sound and work logically, they are fine. They should be evaluated for the solution, they are able to provide for the problems and inspiration they can provide to the mass. Being young can never be virtue of a politician. Utterance of Mrs Gandhi does not have any weight though various media tries to attribute. Her suggestions, in capacity of NAC chairperson, to the government has only sentimental value but lacks any touch with ground realities leading to government refusing to implement them. Food policy can be the best example for the same. Only naive will try to see the such a enormous problem in simple way and provide such solutions.
Her quality has been passed to her son too. Though lot of shine is attributed to Mr Gandhi he is not able to deliver at any front. It is very funny to protect a so called PM in making from any live problem. We hardly listen any statement of any of the Gandhi on any live problem like inflation, 2G, black money. For such topics other generals are employed, who will have to carry the burden of mistake but shift glory, if it comes, to masters. If they happen to say something it can be best term as glorifying wrong doings (We have caught so many scamesters in our part while opposition have done none) or sometimes escapist mentality (Inflation is due to some collision partners and due to the government). The best of them comes when they sit down preaching. They are often quoted saying something similar to statements like truth is good, we should follow law, honesty is the best policy and now like greed is not good.
Jai ho Saint Sonia
http://dailypioneer.com/315264/Pious-words-of-rectitude.html
It had two points mentioned
1. She saw virtue in Mr Hooda`s retirement at age of 64.
2. She mentioned Greed is not good.
One does not have to comment on the second statement. still something can be told for the first one.
Politicians do not have to fight a war. As long as they are mentally sound and work logically, they are fine. They should be evaluated for the solution, they are able to provide for the problems and inspiration they can provide to the mass. Being young can never be virtue of a politician. Utterance of Mrs Gandhi does not have any weight though various media tries to attribute. Her suggestions, in capacity of NAC chairperson, to the government has only sentimental value but lacks any touch with ground realities leading to government refusing to implement them. Food policy can be the best example for the same. Only naive will try to see the such a enormous problem in simple way and provide such solutions.
Her quality has been passed to her son too. Though lot of shine is attributed to Mr Gandhi he is not able to deliver at any front. It is very funny to protect a so called PM in making from any live problem. We hardly listen any statement of any of the Gandhi on any live problem like inflation, 2G, black money. For such topics other generals are employed, who will have to carry the burden of mistake but shift glory, if it comes, to masters. If they happen to say something it can be best term as glorifying wrong doings (We have caught so many scamesters in our part while opposition have done none) or sometimes escapist mentality (Inflation is due to some collision partners and due to the government). The best of them comes when they sit down preaching. They are often quoted saying something similar to statements like truth is good, we should follow law, honesty is the best policy and now like greed is not good.
Jai ho Saint Sonia
TOI reporting SIT report on Modi
Here is what appeared in TOI
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SIT-findings-ensure-Narendra-Modi-cant-shake-off-riot-taint/articleshow/7421365.cms
Nothing more could be expected from TOI
Even without much of thinking, few words are self evident for the kind of reporting. It would be nice to in detail.
Key findings of the inquiry done by former CBI officer A K Malhotra under the supervision of SIT chairman K Raghavan are as follows:
* "The chief minister had tried to water down the seriousness of the situation at Gulbarg Society, Naroda Patia and other places by saying that every action has an equal and opposite reaction," Malhotra reported. "His implied justification of the killings of innocent members of the minority community, read together with an absence of a strong condemnation of the violence that followed Godhra, suggest a partisan stance at a critical juncture when the state had been badly disturbed by communal violence." Raghavan added that Modi's statements were "sweeping and offensive coming as it did from a chief minister, that too at a critical time when Hindu-Muslim tempers were running high."
Watering down is a term which is very much subjective to usage. Still it does not mean negligence. Suggestion from implied justification is attempt to have to have double layered assumptions. Terming that statements were sweeping and offensive is also very subjective interpretations. I doubt if any of these will hold any ground in court of law.
* The report said that Modi's 'controversial' move to place two senior ministers — Ashok Bhatt and I K Jadeja — in the Ahmedabad city police control room and the Gujarat state police control room during the riots with "no definite charter" fuelled the speculation that they "had been placed to interfere in police work and give wrongful decisions to the field officers."
It clearly says it is controversial. Still the findings are speculation which are fuelled by controversies. Is report based on controversies?
* The report affirmed that police officers who took a neutral stand during the riots and prevented massacres had been transferred by the Gujarat government to insignificant postings in a highly 'questionable' manner.
It appears that no statement can be made in plane terms. Questionable manner remains between quote and unquote. Any transfer can be questioned. One should not only stop at question but also look at the answers. Questioning cannot be termed virtue by unless the answers support the intent.
* "The Gujarat government has reportedly destroyed the police wireless communication of the period pertaining to the riots," SIT said, adding, "'No records, documentations or minutes of the crucial law and order meetings held by the government during the riots had been preserved."
So the report is based on lack of evidence.
* The report said Modi displayed a "discriminatory attitude by not visiting the riot-affected areas in Ahmedabad where a large number of Muslims were killed, though he went to Godhra on the same day, travelling almost 300km on a single day."
Was visiting Godhra wrong in the eyes of the investigating officer? Was that not the source of disturbance? How can he manage to be at some other place on the same time which is 300km away.
* According to the report, the Gujarat government did not take any steps to stop the illegal bandh called by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad on February 28, 2002. On the contrary the BJP had also supported the bandh.
When onward the bandhs are classified as legal and illegal? BJP is a political party and has freedom to support or oppose.
* The SIT report also pointed out that the police administration did not impose curfew in Naroda and Meghani Nagar (Ahmedabad city) until 12 and 2pm respectively on 28.02.02 although the situation had by then severely deteriorated at both those places.
It appears that whole talk is coming down to when the curfew was imposed. This point can be further elaborated.
* The SIT discovered that the state police had carried out shoddy investigations in the Naroda Patia and Gulbarg Society massacre cases and deliberately overlooked the cellphone records of Sangh Parivar members and BJP leaders involved in the riots.
Investigation of which agency is shoddier compared to other can be judged by law. No investigation can claim to be 100% fool proof.
* The SIT has also found evidence against the then minister of state for home Gordhan Zadafia (who was reporting directly to Modi) and top police officers such as M K Tandon and P B Gondia for their alleged complicity in the riots.
For their, so called alleged complicity of minister and officer in riot Modi is proven guilty. Will this hold same for Rajiv Gandhi for Sikh massacre or Manmohan Singh for alleged complicity of his minister and officers in scam?
* SIT confirmed that the government appointed VHP and RSS-affiliated advocates as public prosecutors in sensitive riot cases. The report states: "It appears that the political affiliation of the advocates did weigh with the government for the appointment of public prosecutors."
When report has words like appears and seems to be then it should be taken with pinch of salt as they are very subjective opinions. As much fact goes is there any bar on lawyers to have affiliation with VHP and RSS.
TOI seems to have highlighted points which does not stand even when simple logic is applied, it can be doubted that these words can of any use in court of law. The best response to these can be silence. I remember silence was the answer which Mr Modi gave in an interview with Karan Thapar, which was highlighted by many media. Modi gave answer in next poll after that media went silent about that episode.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SIT-findings-ensure-Narendra-Modi-cant-shake-off-riot-taint/articleshow/7421365.cms
Nothing more could be expected from TOI
Even without much of thinking, few words are self evident for the kind of reporting. It would be nice to in detail.
Key findings of the inquiry done by former CBI officer A K Malhotra under the supervision of SIT chairman K Raghavan are as follows:
* "The chief minister had tried to water down the seriousness of the situation at Gulbarg Society, Naroda Patia and other places by saying that every action has an equal and opposite reaction," Malhotra reported. "His implied justification of the killings of innocent members of the minority community, read together with an absence of a strong condemnation of the violence that followed Godhra, suggest a partisan stance at a critical juncture when the state had been badly disturbed by communal violence." Raghavan added that Modi's statements were "sweeping and offensive coming as it did from a chief minister, that too at a critical time when Hindu-Muslim tempers were running high."
Watering down is a term which is very much subjective to usage. Still it does not mean negligence. Suggestion from implied justification is attempt to have to have double layered assumptions. Terming that statements were sweeping and offensive is also very subjective interpretations. I doubt if any of these will hold any ground in court of law.
* The report said that Modi's 'controversial' move to place two senior ministers — Ashok Bhatt and I K Jadeja — in the Ahmedabad city police control room and the Gujarat state police control room during the riots with "no definite charter" fuelled the speculation that they "had been placed to interfere in police work and give wrongful decisions to the field officers."
It clearly says it is controversial. Still the findings are speculation which are fuelled by controversies. Is report based on controversies?
* The report affirmed that police officers who took a neutral stand during the riots and prevented massacres had been transferred by the Gujarat government to insignificant postings in a highly 'questionable' manner.
It appears that no statement can be made in plane terms. Questionable manner remains between quote and unquote. Any transfer can be questioned. One should not only stop at question but also look at the answers. Questioning cannot be termed virtue by unless the answers support the intent.
* "The Gujarat government has reportedly destroyed the police wireless communication of the period pertaining to the riots," SIT said, adding, "'No records, documentations or minutes of the crucial law and order meetings held by the government during the riots had been preserved."
So the report is based on lack of evidence.
* The report said Modi displayed a "discriminatory attitude by not visiting the riot-affected areas in Ahmedabad where a large number of Muslims were killed, though he went to Godhra on the same day, travelling almost 300km on a single day."
Was visiting Godhra wrong in the eyes of the investigating officer? Was that not the source of disturbance? How can he manage to be at some other place on the same time which is 300km away.
* According to the report, the Gujarat government did not take any steps to stop the illegal bandh called by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad on February 28, 2002. On the contrary the BJP had also supported the bandh.
When onward the bandhs are classified as legal and illegal? BJP is a political party and has freedom to support or oppose.
* The SIT report also pointed out that the police administration did not impose curfew in Naroda and Meghani Nagar (Ahmedabad city) until 12 and 2pm respectively on 28.02.02 although the situation had by then severely deteriorated at both those places.
It appears that whole talk is coming down to when the curfew was imposed. This point can be further elaborated.
* The SIT discovered that the state police had carried out shoddy investigations in the Naroda Patia and Gulbarg Society massacre cases and deliberately overlooked the cellphone records of Sangh Parivar members and BJP leaders involved in the riots.
Investigation of which agency is shoddier compared to other can be judged by law. No investigation can claim to be 100% fool proof.
* The SIT has also found evidence against the then minister of state for home Gordhan Zadafia (who was reporting directly to Modi) and top police officers such as M K Tandon and P B Gondia for their alleged complicity in the riots.
For their, so called alleged complicity of minister and officer in riot Modi is proven guilty. Will this hold same for Rajiv Gandhi for Sikh massacre or Manmohan Singh for alleged complicity of his minister and officers in scam?
* SIT confirmed that the government appointed VHP and RSS-affiliated advocates as public prosecutors in sensitive riot cases. The report states: "It appears that the political affiliation of the advocates did weigh with the government for the appointment of public prosecutors."
When report has words like appears and seems to be then it should be taken with pinch of salt as they are very subjective opinions. As much fact goes is there any bar on lawyers to have affiliation with VHP and RSS.
TOI seems to have highlighted points which does not stand even when simple logic is applied, it can be doubted that these words can of any use in court of law. The best response to these can be silence. I remember silence was the answer which Mr Modi gave in an interview with Karan Thapar, which was highlighted by many media. Modi gave answer in next poll after that media went silent about that episode.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)