Tuesday, July 28, 2009

On the Unique ID project

My Frontline article on the unique ID card project of the government is at

http://www.flonnet.com/fl2616/stories/20090814261604900.htm


CONTROVERSY

High-cost, high-risk

R. RAMAKUMAR

The UPA government is going ahead with the ID card project, ignoring criticisms and alternative suggestions.

Read on...

ഇച്ഛാശക്തിയുടെ ദാരിദ്ര്യം: 2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തെ കേന്ദ്ര ബജറ്റ്

Poverty of Will എന്ന ശീര്‍ഷകത്തില്‍ ഞാന്‍ Frontline ദ്വൈ-മാസികയില്‍ എഴുതിയ 2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തെ ബജറ്റ് വിശകലനത്തിന്റെ മലയാള പരിഭാഷ. കഴിഞ്ഞ ചിന്ത വാരികയില്‍ പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ചത്:

ഇച്ഛാശക്തിയുടെ ദാരിദ്ര്യം

ആര്‍ രാംകുമാര്‍


ഇന്ത്യയില്‍ സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലയ്ക്കുവേണ്ടി ചെലവാക്കുന്ന മൊത്തം തുകയില്‍ 20 ശതമാനം മാത്രമേ കേന്ദ്ര ഗവണ്‍മെന്റിന്റെ വിഹിതമായിട്ടുള്ളു. ബാക്കിയുള്ളതെല്ലാം സംസ്ഥാന ഗവണ്‍മെന്റുകളാണ് ചെലവാക്കുന്നത് എന്നതാണ് ഏറ്റവും ശ്രദ്ധേയമായ കാര്യം. മറ്റൊരുവിധത്തില്‍ പറഞ്ഞാല്‍ മാനവ വികസനത്തെ സംബന്ധിച്ചിടത്തോളം സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലയില്‍ ചെലവാക്കുന്നതിനു സംസ്ഥാനങ്ങള്‍ക്കുള്ള കഴിവാണ്, കേന്ദ്രഗവണ്‍മെന്റിന്റെ കഴിവല്ല പ്രധാനം എന്നര്‍ഥം. ഇതിനെത്തന്നെ മറ്റൊരുവിധത്തില്‍ക്കൂടി പറയാം. സാമൂഹ്യ മേഖലയ്ക്കുവേണ്ടി കേന്ദ്രഗവണ്‍മെന്റ് വകയിരുത്തുന്ന തുകകൊണ്ട് (സംസ്ഥാനങ്ങളുടെ വിഹിതം അതോടൊപ്പം വര്‍ധിപ്പിക്കുന്നില്ലെങ്കില്‍) വളരെ വലിയ മാറ്റമൊന്നും ഉണ്ടാക്കാന്‍ കഴിയുകയില്ല.

എങ്കിലും, ഇന്ത്യയില്‍ സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലയ്ക്കുവേണ്ടി വകയിരുത്തുന്ന തുകയെ സംബന്ധിച്ച ചര്‍ച്ചകള്‍, കേന്ദ്ര ഗവണ്‍മെന്റിന്റെ ആഭിമുഖ്യത്തിലുള്ളവയ്ക്ക് അമിത പ്രാധാന്യം നല്‍കിക്കൊണ്ടുള്ളതാണ്. 2004നുശേഷം കേന്ദ്ര ഗവണ്‍മെന്റിന്റെ ആഭിമുഖ്യത്തില്‍ ആവിഷ്കരിക്കപ്പെട്ട ദേശീയ ഗ്രാമീണ തൊഴിലുറപ്പുപദ്ധതി (എന്‍ആര്‍ഇ ജിഎസ്), ദേശീയ ഗ്രാമീണ ആരോഗ്യമിഷന്‍, (എന്‍ആര്‍എച്ച്എം), സര്‍വശിക്ഷാ അഭിയാന്‍ (എസ്എസ്എ) തുടങ്ങിയ ഏതാനും പദ്ധതികള്‍ ആവിര്‍ഭവിച്ചതിനുശേഷമാണ് ഇങ്ങനെ കേന്ദ്രത്തിന് അമിത പ്രാധാന്യം ലഭിച്ചുതുടങ്ങിയത്. സംസ്ഥാന ഗവണ്‍മെന്റുകളുടെ മുന്‍കയ്യിനെ ഒഴിവാക്കിക്കൊണ്ട് കേന്ദ്ര ഗവണ്‍മെന്റിന്റെ പദ്ധതികള്‍ ആവിഷ്കരിച്ച് വികസിപ്പിക്കുന്നതിന്റെ ആശാസ്യതയെ പല പണ്ഡിതന്മാരും ചോദ്യംചെയ്തിട്ടുണ്ട്. അതെന്തായാലും കേന്ദ്ര മേഖലാ പദ്ധതികള്‍ എണ്ണത്തിന്റെ കാര്യത്തിലും വ്യാപ്തിയുടെ കാര്യത്തിലും വര്‍ധിപ്പിക്കാന്‍ തുടങ്ങി. 2009-10ലെ ബജറ്റിലും പ്രധാന സാമൂഹ്യ മേഖലയ്ക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തലുകളെല്ലാം, ഈയിടെ ആരംഭിച്ച കേന്ദ്ര പദ്ധതികളിലൂടെയാണ് വഴി തിരിച്ചുവിട്ടിരിക്കുന്നത്.

ഇന്ത്യയെപ്പോലെ സാമൂഹ്യമായും സാമ്പത്തികമായും പിന്നണിയില്‍ക്കിടക്കുന്ന ഒരു രാജ്യത്ത് സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലയില്‍ അടിയന്തിരമായും വമ്പിച്ച സര്‍ക്കാര്‍ മുതല്‍മുടക്ക് ആവശ്യമാണ് എന്ന് പറയേണ്ടതില്ലല്ലോ. മൊത്തം ആഭ്യന്തര ഉല്‍പാദനവുമായി താരതമ്യപ്പെടുത്തുമ്പോള്‍, സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലയ്ക്കുള്ള ചെലവ്, 1990കളിലും 2000-09ലെ ആദ്യവര്‍ഷങ്ങളിലും ഏറെക്കുറെ വര്‍ദ്ധിക്കാതെ മുരടിച്ചുനില്‍ക്കുകയായിരുന്നുവെന്നത് ആശങ്കാജനകമായ ഒരു കാര്യമാണ്. സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലയ്ക്കുവേണ്ടിയുള്ള മൊത്ത വകയിരുത്തല്‍ 2004-2009ലെ ഒന്നാം യുപിഎ ഗവണ്‍മെന്റ് വര്‍ദ്ധിപ്പിച്ചത് ഇടതുപക്ഷ കക്ഷികളുടെയും മറ്റ് പുരോഗമന-സാമൂഹ്യപ്രസ്ഥാനങ്ങളുടെയും നിര്‍ബന്ധംകൊണ്ടായിരുന്നു. യുപിഎ ഗവണ്‍മെന്റ് ഉയര്‍ത്തിക്കാണിക്കുന്ന ചില പദ്ധതികള്‍ക്കുവേണ്ടിയാണ് ഇങ്ങനെ വകയിരുത്തല്‍ വര്‍ദ്ധിപ്പിച്ചത്.

അതെന്തായാലും, ഇങ്ങനെ വകയിരുത്തലില്‍ വരുത്തിയ വര്‍ദ്ധന, ഓരോരോ പദ്ധതികളിലും ഓരോരോ മേഖലകളിലും പല അനുപാതത്തിലായിരുന്നു. വിദ്യാഭ്യാസം തുടങ്ങിയ ചില പ്രധാന മേഖലകളില്‍ വകയിരുത്തല്‍ കുറയുകതന്നെയുണ്ടായി. എസ്എസ്എയ്ക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തല്‍, 2007നുശേഷം കേവലമായ സംഖ്യാ കണക്കില്‍ത്തന്നെ കുറഞ്ഞു. 2007-08ല്‍ എസ്എസ്എക്കുവേണ്ടിയുള്ള ചെലവ് (പരിഷ്കരിച്ച കണക്കുകള്‍) 12,020 കോടി രൂപയായിരുന്നത്, 2008-09ലെ പരിഷ്കരിച്ച കണക്കനുസരിച്ച് 11,940 കോടി രൂപയായും 2009-10 ലെ ഇടക്കാല ബജറ്റിലെ വകയിരുത്തല്‍ അനുസരിച്ച് 11,934 കോടി രൂപയായും കുറഞ്ഞു എന്നു മാത്രമല്ല എസ്എസ്എയ്ക്കുള്ള സംസ്ഥാനങ്ങളുടെ വിഹിതം വര്‍ദ്ധിപ്പിക്കുകയും ചെയ്തു. എന്നാല്‍ സംസ്ഥാനങ്ങള്‍ക്ക് ആകെ വിട്ടുകൊടുക്കുന്നതുകയില്‍ അതിനനുസരിച്ച് വര്‍ദ്ധന വരുത്തിയതുമില്ല. നേരെമറിച്ച് സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലയ്ക്കുവേണ്ടിയുള്ള വകയിരുത്തല്‍ വര്‍ധിപ്പിച്ചതുമൂലം ഏറ്റവും കൂടുതല്‍ മെച്ചമുണ്ടായത് ഗ്രാമീണ തൊഴിലുറപ്പ് പദ്ധതിക്കാണ്.

ഇത്തരമൊരു പശ്ചാത്തലത്തില്‍, ഏതൊരു പുതിയ ഗവണ്‍മെന്റും നാല് അടിയന്തിരനടപടികള്‍ കൈക്കൊള്ളും എന്നാണ് ആരും പ്രതീക്ഷിക്കുക. ഒന്നാമത് സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലയ്ക്ക് മൊത്തത്തില്‍ വകയിരുത്തുന്ന തുക വര്‍ദ്ധിപ്പിക്കുക എന്ന നയം തുടരുക. രണ്ടാമത് ചില പ്രധാന മേഖലകളായ എസ്എസ്എ തുടങ്ങിയവയ്ക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തല്‍ 2004-2009 കാലഘട്ടത്തില്‍ കുറച്ചുകൊണ്ടുവന്നത് നേര്‍ വിപരീതമാക്കുക. മൂന്നാമത് ഓരോ കേന്ദ്ര മേഖലാ പദ്ധതിയോടുമൊപ്പം വിവിധ സംസ്ഥാനങ്ങളില്‍ അതുമായി ബന്ധപ്പെട്ട പദ്ധതികള്‍ ഏറ്റെടുക്കുമെന്ന് ഉറപ്പുവരുത്തുക. നാലാമത് സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലയില്‍ ചെലവാക്കുന്ന തുക ഉയര്‍ത്താനുള്ള സംസ്ഥാനങ്ങളുടെ കഴിവ് വര്‍ദ്ധിപ്പിക്കുക - അതിനായി കേന്ദ്രം സംസ്ഥാനങ്ങള്‍ക്ക് വിട്ടുകൊടുക്കുന്ന ഫണ്ട് വര്‍ദ്ധിപ്പിക്കുകയും കൂടുതല്‍ തുക വായ്പ എടുക്കാനുള്ള സൌകര്യം സംസ്ഥാനങ്ങള്‍ക്ക് ഉണ്ടാക്കുകയും ചെയ്യുക. ഇതില്‍ പറഞ്ഞ മൂന്നുംനാലും കാര്യങ്ങള്‍ ബജറ്റിനുപുറത്തുവരുന്ന വിഷയങ്ങളാണ്. അതുകൊണ്ട്, ബജറ്റിനുള്ളില്‍ നിന്നുകൊണ്ട് കേന്ദ്ര ഗവണ്‍മെന്റിനുചെയ്യാന്‍ കഴിയുന്ന കാര്യങ്ങളെക്കുറിച്ചുമാത്രം നമുക്ക് ഈ ലേഖനത്തില്‍ പരാമര്‍ശിക്കാം.

പ്രണബ് മുഖര്‍ജി അവതരിപ്പിച്ച 2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തെ ബജറ്റ് ഇക്കാര്യത്തില്‍ നിരാശാജനകമാണെന്ന് പറയാതെവയ്യ. ഗവണ്‍മെന്റിന്റെ റവന്യൂചെലവ് നമുക്കൊന്ന് പരിശോധിക്കാം. റവന്യു അക്കൌണ്ടിലുള്ള സാമൂഹ്യസേവനചെലവുകള്‍ 2008-09നും 2009-10നും ഇടയ്ക്ക് കേവലമായ സംഖ്യ കണക്കില്‍ വര്‍ധിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ടെങ്കിലും ഈ ഇനത്തിലുള്ള വകയിരുത്തലിന്റെ വര്‍ദ്ധനയുടെ നിരക്ക്, കഴിഞ്ഞവര്‍ഷത്തെ അപേക്ഷിച്ച് കുറഞ്ഞിരിക്കുകയാണ്. ഉദാഹരണത്തിന് പട്ടിക 1 ല്‍ നിന്ന് വ്യക്തമാകുന്നതുപോലെ, സാമൂഹ്യ സേവനങ്ങള്‍ക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തല്‍ 2007-08നെ അപേക്ഷിച്ച് 2008-09 വര്‍ഷത്തില്‍ 35.7 ശതമാനം വര്‍ദ്ധിച്ചുവെങ്കില്‍ 2008-09ല്‍ യഥാര്‍ത്ഥത്തില്‍ ചെലവാക്കിയ (അഥവാ പുതുക്കിയ കണക്ക്) തുകയെ അപേക്ഷിച്ച് 2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തിലെ വകയിരുത്തലില്‍ ഉണ്ടായ വര്‍ദ്ധന 19.7 ശതമാനം മാത്രമാണ്.


സാമൂഹ്യസേവനങ്ങള്‍ക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തലില്‍ ഉണ്ടായിട്ടുള്ള കേവലമായ സംഖ്യകണക്കിലുള്ള വര്‍ദ്ധന, ജിഡിപിയുടെ ഒരു വിഹിതമെന്ന നിലയില്‍ കണക്കാക്കുമ്പോള്‍ അധികമൊന്നും ഉയര്‍ന്നിട്ടില്ലെന്നും കാണാം. 2008-09നും 2009-10നും ഇടയില്‍ സാമൂഹ്യ സേവനങ്ങള്‍ക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തല്‍, മൊത്തം ജിഡിപിയുടെ അനുപാതമെന്നനിലയില്‍ കണക്കാക്കിയാല്‍ 1.54 ശതമാനത്തില്‍നിന്ന് 1.68 ശതമാനമായിട്ടേ വര്‍ദ്ധിച്ചിട്ടുള്ളൂ (പട്ടിക-2).


2009-10ലെ ബജറ്റില്‍ സാമൂഹ്യസേവനങ്ങള്‍ക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തലിലുണ്ടായ ചുരുക്കം, ബജറ്റിലെ മൊത്തം റവന്യു ചെലവിലുണ്ടായ ചുരുക്കത്തിന്റെതന്നെ പ്രതിഫലനമാണ്. 2007-08നും 2008-09നും ഇടയില്‍ മൊത്തം റവന്യു ചെലവിലുണ്ടായ വര്‍ദ്ധനയുടെ നിരക്ക് 39.2 ശതമാനം ആയിരുന്നുവെങ്കില്‍ 2008-09നും 2009-10നും ഇടയില്‍ മൊത്തം റവന്യു ചെലവിലുണ്ടായ വര്‍ദ്ധനയുടെ നിരക്ക് 1.6 ശതമാനം മാത്രമാണ്. കൃഷിയും ഗ്രാമീണ വികസനവും അടക്കമുള്ള സാമ്പത്തിക സേവനങ്ങള്‍ക്കുവേണ്ടിയുള്ള വകയിരുത്തലില്‍ കേവലമായ സംഖ്യ കണക്കില്‍ത്തന്നെ കുറവാണ് സംഭവിച്ചത്. 2008-09 വര്‍ഷത്തില്‍ ഈ ഇനത്തില്‍ വകയിരുത്തിയത് 4.5 ലക്ഷം കോടി രൂപയാണെങ്കില്‍ 2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തില്‍ അത് 3.8 ലക്ഷം കോടി രൂപയായി കുറഞ്ഞു. എന്നാല്‍ 2008-09 വര്‍ഷത്തില്‍ ഇത്ര ഉയര്‍ന്ന തുക വകയിരുത്തിയത് വില നിയന്ത്രണം നീക്കം ചെയ്യപ്പെട്ട രാസവളങ്ങള്‍ കുറഞ്ഞ വിലയ്ക്ക് വില്‍ക്കുന്നതിനായി ഉല്‍പാദകര്‍ക്കും ഏജന്‍സികള്‍ക്കും നല്‍കേണ്ടി വരുന്ന തുക കണക്കിലെടുത്തിട്ടാണ്. അതുകാരണം വിള പരിപാലനം എന്ന ഇനത്തില്‍ ചെലവ് കുത്തനെ കൂടി. 2007-08, 2009-10 എന്നീ വര്‍ഷങ്ങളാണ് നാം താരതമ്യത്തിനായി പരിഗണിക്കുന്നതെങ്കില്‍ എല്ലാ സാമ്പത്തിക സേവനങ്ങള്‍ക്കും കൂടിയുള്ള മൊത്തം ചെലവ്, ജിഡിപിയുടെ അനുപാതമെന്ന നിലയില്‍ കണക്കാക്കുമ്പോള്‍ 5.55 ശതമാനത്തില്‍നിന്ന് 6.42 ശതമാനമായി വര്‍ദ്ധിച്ചതായിക്കാണാം. (പട്ടിക-2)

രണ്ടാമത്, നാം ഓരോ മേഖലയായി പരിഗണിക്കുകയാണെങ്കില്‍ ചെലവിലുണ്ടാകുന്ന വര്‍ധനയുടെ നിരക്ക് 2007 വര്‍ഷംതൊട്ട് കുറഞ്ഞുകൊണ്ടു വരുന്നതായി കാണാം. ഉദാഹരണത്തിന് കുടുംബക്ഷേമം, ജലവിതരണം, ശുചീകരണം എന്നീ മൂന്ന് ഇനങ്ങളിലൊഴിച്ച് എല്ലാ പ്രധാനപ്പെട്ട സേവനമേഖലകളിലും, വകയിരുത്തലില്‍ ഉണ്ടായ വര്‍ധനയുടെ നിരക്ക് 2008-09നെ അപേക്ഷിച്ച് 2009-10ല്‍ കുറവാണെന്ന് കാണാം. പൊതു വിദ്യാഭ്യാസത്തിന്റെ കാര്യത്തില്‍ വളര്‍ച്ചാനിരക്ക് 28 ശതമാനത്തില്‍നിന്ന് 17 ശതമാനമായി ഇടിഞ്ഞു; മെഡിക്കല്‍-പൊതുജനാരോഗ്യവകുപ്പില്‍ വളര്‍ച്ചാനിരക്ക് ഇടിഞ്ഞത് 20 ശതമാനത്തില്‍നിന്ന് 18 ശതമാനമായിട്ടാണ്; പാര്‍പ്പിട നിര്‍മ്മാണത്തിലെ ചെലവിന്റെ വര്‍ദ്ധനനിരക്ക് 95 ശതമാനത്തില്‍നിന്ന് 2.5 ശതമാനമായി കുറഞ്ഞു; സാമൂഹ്യ സുരക്ഷിതത്വം, സാമൂഹ്യക്ഷേമം എന്നീ ഇനങ്ങളില്‍ 49 ശതമാനത്തില്‍നിന്ന് 10 ശതമാനമായും കുറഞ്ഞു. ജിഡിപിയുടെ 6 ശതമാനം വിദ്യാഭ്യാസത്തിനുവേണ്ടിയും 3 ശതമാനം പൊതുജനാരോഗ്യത്തിനുവേണ്ടിയും ചെലവാക്കും എന്ന ലക്ഷ്യം സാക്ഷാല്‍ക്കരിക്കുന്നതിന് സര്‍ക്കാര്‍ യാതൊരു താല്‍പര്യവും കാണിക്കുന്നില്ല. പൊതു വിദ്യാഭ്യാസത്തിന്റെകാര്യത്തിലുള്ള റവന്യുചെലവ്, 2008-09 വര്‍ഷത്തില്‍ ജിഡിപിയുടെ 0.52 ശതമാനമായിരുന്നത് 2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തില്‍ 0.56 ശതമാനമായി മാത്രമാണ് വര്‍ദ്ധിപ്പിച്ചിട്ടുള്ളത്. എസ്എസ്എ തുടങ്ങിയ, വിദ്യാഭ്യാസത്തിലെ പ്രത്യേക ഇനങ്ങള്‍ക്ക് നീക്കിവെച്ചതുക, കേവലമായ അടിസ്ഥാനത്തില്‍തന്നെ കുറഞ്ഞിരിക്കുന്നു. (പട്ടിക 3). 2008-09 വര്‍ഷത്തെ അപേക്ഷിച്ച്, 2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തില്‍ എസ്എസ്എയ്ക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തല്‍ 11,939.3 കോടി രൂപയില്‍ നിന്ന് 11,933.9 കോടി രൂപയായി കുറഞ്ഞിരിക്കുന്നു. അതുപോലെ ഉച്ചഭക്ഷണ പദ്ധതിക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തല്‍ 7200 കോടി രൂപയില്‍നിന്ന് 7014 കോടി രൂപയായും കുറച്ചിരിക്കുന്നു.


എന്നുതന്നെയല്ല, പ്രൈമറി വിദ്യാഭ്യാസത്തിന് കൂടുതല്‍ തുക വകയിരുത്തേണ്ട സ്ഥാനത്ത്, അതിനുപകരം സെക്കണ്ടറി വിദ്യാഭ്യാസത്തിന് കൂടുതല്‍ തുക വകയിരുത്തിക്കൊണ്ടുവരുത്തിയിട്ടുള്ള വ്യതിയാനം ആശങ്കാജനകമാണുതാനും. സെക്കണ്ടറി വിദ്യാഭ്യാസത്തിന് കൂടുതല്‍ തുക വകയിരുത്തേണ്ടത് ആവശ്യം തന്നെ. എന്നാല്‍ പ്രൈമറി വിദ്യാഭ്യാസത്തിന്റെ ചെലവിലായിക്കൂട ഇത്. അങ്ങനെ ചെയ്യുന്നുവെങ്കില്‍ അത് ഉല്‍പാദനപരമല്ല.

ആരോഗ്യത്തിന്റെ മേഖലയില്‍ കേന്ദ്രഗവണ്‍മെന്റിന്റെ ചെലവിന്റെ വിഹിതം ജിഡിപിയെ അപേക്ഷിച്ചു മരവിച്ചു നില്‍ക്കുകയാണ് -2007 തൊട്ടുള്ള സ്ഥിതി അതാണ്. 2008-09ലും 2009-10ലും പൊതുജനാരോഗ്യ- മെഡിക്കല്‍ മേഖലകളിലുള്ള ചെലവ് ജിഡിപിയുടെ 0.12 ശതമാനം തന്നെയായി നിലനില്‍ക്കുകയാണ്. കുടുംബക്ഷേമത്തിന്റെ ഇനത്തിലുള്ള ചെലവ് 2008-09ല്‍ ജിഡിപിയുടെ 0.11 ശതമാനം ആയിരുന്നത് 2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തില്‍ 0.12 ശതമാനമായി ഒരല്‍പം വര്‍ധിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ടെങ്കിലും ഫലത്തില്‍ അത് 2007-08 വര്‍ഷത്തിലെ അനുപാതത്തിലേക്ക് വീണ്ടും എത്തിച്ചേര്‍ന്നു എന്നേ പറയാന്‍ കഴിയൂ.

2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തിലെ ബജറ്റില്‍ പൊതുജനങ്ങളുടെ ശ്രദ്ധ ആകര്‍ഷിച്ച ഒരിനം ചെലവ് ഗ്രാമീണ തൊഴിലുറപ്പു പദ്ധതിക്കു വേണ്ടിയുള്ളതാണ്. 2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തേക്ക് എന്‍ആര്‍ഇജിഎസ് പദ്ധതിക്ക് 39,100 കോടി രൂപ നീക്കിവെച്ചിരിക്കുന്നുവെന്ന് ധനകാര്യമന്ത്രി പ്രഖ്യാപിക്കുകയുണ്ടായി. 2008-09 വര്‍ഷത്തിലെ ബജറ്റ് മതിപ്പ് കണക്കിനേക്കാള്‍ 144 ശതമാനം അധികമാണ് ഇതെന്ന് തോന്നാം. എന്നാല്‍ യഥാര്‍ത്ഥത്തിലുള്ള സ്ഥിതി മൂടിവെയ്ക്കുന്നതിനുള്ള സമര്‍ത്ഥമായ ഒരു വേലയാണ് ധനകാര്യമന്ത്രി ഇവിടെ പ്രയോഗിച്ചിരിക്കുന്നത്. എന്‍ആര്‍ഇജിഎസ്സിനുവേണ്ടി മുന്‍വര്‍ഷങ്ങളില്‍ വകയിരുത്തിയ തുകകളുടെ കണക്ക് ഇവിടെ ആവശ്യമായി വരും.

2008-09 വര്‍ഷത്തേക്കുള്ള സമ്പൂര്‍ണ്ണ ബജറ്റില്‍ അന്നത്തെ ധനകാര്യമന്ത്രി പി ചിദംബരം എന്‍ആര്‍ഇജിഎസ്സിനു വേണ്ടി മാറ്റിവെച്ചത് 16000 കോടി രൂപയാണ്. ബജറ്റ് അവതരിപ്പിച്ചതിനുശേഷം, എന്‍ആര്‍ഇജിഎസ് പദ്ധതി രാജ്യത്തെ 596 ജില്ലകളിലേക്കും വ്യാപിപ്പിക്കുന്നതിന് ഗവണ്‍മെന്റ് തീരുമാനിച്ചു. ആവശ്യക്കാരുടെ എണ്ണം അനുസരിച്ചുള്ള ഒരു പദ്ധതിയായതിനാല്‍ ആ വര്‍ഷത്തെ പുതുക്കിയ കണക്കനുസരിച്ച് ചെലവ് 36,750 കോടി രൂപയായിരുന്നു. 2009-10 വര്‍ഷത്തില്‍ ബജറ്റിലെ വകയിരുത്തല്‍ 39100 കോടി രൂപയാണ്. 2008-09 വര്‍ഷം ചെലവാക്കിയ തുകയെ അപേക്ഷിച്ച് അത് ഏതാണ്ട് 7 ശതമാനം മാത്രമേ അധികം വരികയുള്ളൂ. 2008-09ലെ കാലഹരണപ്പെട്ട ബജറ്റ് വകയിരുത്തലുമായി ഇങ്ങനെ താരതമ്യപ്പെടുത്തുന്നത്, ഇപ്പോഴത്തെ ബജറ്റില്‍ എന്തോ വലിയ കാര്യം ചെയ്യുന്നുവെന്ന് തോന്നിപ്പിക്കുന്നതിനാണ്. ഈ തന്ത്രത്തെ പല പണ്ഡിതന്മാരും വിമര്‍ശിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ട്.

"എന്‍ആര്‍ഇജിഎസ്സിനുകീഴില്‍ ദിവസത്തില്‍ 100 രൂപ എന്ന നിരക്കില്‍ യഥാര്‍ത്ഥ കൂലി നല്‍കാന്‍ തങ്ങള്‍ ബാധ്യസ്ഥരാണ്'' എന്ന് ബജറ്റില്‍ പറഞ്ഞത് പലരും വലിയ കാര്യമായി പൊക്കിക്കാണിക്കുന്നുണ്ട്. എന്നാല്‍ എന്‍ആര്‍ഇജിഎസ്സിനുവേണ്ടി നീക്കിവെച്ചിട്ടുള്ള തുകയില്‍ വലിയ വര്‍ദ്ധന വരുത്തുന്നില്ലെങ്കില്‍, 2010ലും ഈ ബാധ്യത നിറവേറ്റപ്പെടാതെ പോകും എന്നതാണ് യാഥാര്‍ത്ഥ്യം.

ആവശ്യമായ വകയിരുത്തല്‍ നടത്താതെ ഉഗ്രന്‍ പ്രസ്താവനകള്‍ നടത്തുന്നത് ബജറ്റ് പ്രസംഗത്തിലെ മറ്റൊരു വേലയാണ്. ഉദാഹരണത്തിന് ബിപിഎല്‍ വിഭാഗത്തില്‍പെടുന്ന കുടുംബങ്ങള്‍ക്ക് മാസത്തില്‍ 25 കിലോ ധാന്യം (ഗോതമ്പോ അരിയോ) കിലോക്ക് 3 രൂപ വെച്ച് വിതരണം ചെയ്യുമെന്ന ഉഗ്രന്‍ പ്രഖ്യാപനം ബജറ്റിലുണ്ടെങ്കിലും, അതിനായി ഏറെക്കുറെ ഒരൊറ്റ പൈസയും വകയിരുത്തിയിട്ടില്ല. ഭക്ഷ്യസബ്സിഡിയ്ക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തല്‍ 2008-09 വര്‍ഷത്തെ 43,627 കോടി രൂപയില്‍നിന്ന് നാമമാത്രമായി വര്‍ദ്ധിപ്പിച്ച് 52,490 കോടി രൂപയാക്കിയിട്ടേയുള്ളൂ.

അതുപോലെത്തന്നെ, വളരെ പ്രധാനപ്പെട്ട ഒരിനമായ സമഗ്ര ശിശുക്ഷേമ വികസന സേവനങ്ങള്‍ക്കുള്ള വകയിരുത്തലില്‍ വലിയ വര്‍ദ്ധനയൊന്നും വരുത്തിയിട്ടില്ല. അസംഘടിത തൊഴിലാളികള്‍ക്കുവേണ്ടിയുള്ള സാമൂഹ്യസുരക്ഷാ പദ്ധതികള്‍ നടപ്പാക്കേണ്ടത് അത്യാവശ്യമായ കാര്യമാണ്. എന്നാല്‍ "ഇത്തരം പദ്ധതികള്‍ക്ക് ആവശ്യമായ വകയിരുത്തല്‍ നടത്തും'' എന്ന സമാശ്വാസകരമായ ഒരു പ്രസ്താവന മാത്രമേ ബജറ്റിലുള്ളൂ.

പുതിയ യുപിഎ ഗവണ്‍മെന്റിന്റെ ഒന്നാമത്തെ ബജറ്റ് ശ്രദ്ധേയമായിത്തീരുന്നത്, സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലകള്‍ക്കുള്ള ചെലവുകള്‍ വര്‍ദ്ധിപ്പിക്കുന്നതിന് ദൃഢമായ പ്രതിജ്ഞാബദ്ധത അത് കാണിക്കുന്നില്ല എന്നതിലാണ്. ഇത്തരം പദ്ധതികള്‍ക്കുവേണ്ടി മൊത്തത്തിലുള്ള വകയിരുത്തല്‍ തീരെ അപര്യാപ്തമാണ്. അതേ അവസരത്തില്‍ത്തന്നെ, പല സുപ്രധാന പദ്ധതികള്‍ക്കുവേണ്ടിയുള്ള വകയിരുത്തലും കുറയുകയുമാണ്. സാമൂഹ്യമേഖലയില്‍ ഇടക്കാല ലക്ഷ്യങ്ങള്‍ കൈവരിക്കുന്നതിന് ഈ പദ്ധതികളില്‍ പലതും അനിവാര്യമാണെന്ന് ധനകാര്യമന്ത്രി ബജറ്റ് പ്രസംഗത്തില്‍ പ്രസ്താവിച്ചിട്ടുമുണ്ട്. എന്നാല്‍ അവയ്ക്കുവേണ്ടി വകയിരുത്തിയിട്ടുള്ള തുക പരിഗണിച്ചാല്‍, ഈ ലക്ഷ്യങ്ങള്‍ കൈവരിക്കാന്‍ പ്രയാസമാണെന്ന് കാണാം.

Friday, July 24, 2009

The CPI (M) central committee note on the Lavalin case

The CPI (M) central committee, after its two-day meeting of Kerala affairs, has released a detailed note on the facts in the SNC-Lavalin case. The note was serialised in Deshabhimani over four days. The note is given below. It clearly brings out the hollowness of claims made about the case.

Click to download and read...

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3
Part 4

For the text of the note, please also visit http://workersforum.blogspot.com/2009/07/blog-post_24.html

Friday, July 17, 2009

On the financial crisis and the growth of Japanese Communist Party


A set of news items on the growth of the Japanese Communist Party (JCP) in the recent years is below:


Support building for the Japanese Communist Party
Communist party surges as Japan’s economy withers

By ERIC TALMADGE, Saturday, April 25, 2009

TOKYO (AP) — Under a big red flag, the headquarters of the Communist Party of Japan are the center of the most vibrant grass-roots movement in the country. The party’s ranks are swelling, it has 24,000 branch offices and more than a million people read its newspaper. Only one party — the one that runs the country — beats it at fundraising.

As Japan’s economy withers, communism is coming to life.

Dormant in the boom years and marginalized even as Japan more recently clawed its way out of recession, the party’s litany of capitalist evils is now resonating deeply with many Japanese — especially the young — who are feeling the pain of an economic downturn that some say has reached depression dimensions.

While the Communist Party — which is the fourth-largest party in parliament, but has only 16 of the total 722 seats — is not likely to take over anytime soon, it is making itself felt.

On college campuses, in particular, Karl Marx is popular again.

“I have never voted before, but I intend to vote communist in the next elections,” said Suguru Yagi, a Tokyo college student.

Yagi, 22, said he had considered joining the party because he agrees with many of its policies and sees it as the defender of the working class. As a student about to graduate, he is concerned about the shrinking work force, and the difficulties he may find in getting a good job.

Leading Japan’s communist renaissance is Kazuo Shii, the round-faced party chief, who has become one of Japan’s most recognizable politicians and something of a media star, grilling the country’s conservative leaders from his perch in parliament and unfailingly appearing before the cameras with what boils down to: “I told you so.”

Financial meltdowns worldwide. Banks and manufacturers going belly up, or begging for bailouts. Unemployment and unrest on the rise.

Capitalism, Shii concludes, is doomed.


“It is inevitable,” he said in a recent interview with The Associated Press. “When the persimmon is ripe, it will fall from the tree.”

Shii, and the party, believe that time is fast approaching. And, in Asia’s most dedicated bastion of capitalism, more people are beginning to agree.

According to the party, about 1,000 new members are joining its ranks every month — a sharp contrast to the massive exodus that has plagued the ruling Liberal Democrats, who have dropped from about 5 million members in their heyday to about 1 million members now.

The Japan Communist Party was founded as an illegal movement in 1922, but legalized after Japan’s World War II defeat in 1945. It then struggled through polarizing splits with the Soviets and Communist Chinese in an effort to maintain its independence. It also has distanced itself from the radical left, which gained popularity in the 1960s and ‘70s, but has since died down.

Shii attributed the renewed interest in the party to voter disillusionment with future prospects in an increasingly difficult job market. People who have lost their jobs or their pensions are turning to the party. There is increasing distrust of the centrist Liberal Democrats and their main rivals, the Democratic Party of Japan, who are also conservative and are, in fact, led by a former Liberal Democrat.


The communist revival has also been spurred on by the pop media.

Marx’s Das Kapital is now available in cartoon form, and a surprise best-seller of the year has been a revival version of “Kanikosen,” a 1929 novel about exploited workers on a crab boat. That novel, too, is out in manga form, and is being made into a movie.

In Japan, the Communist Party has swelled to about 415,000 members at latest count and boasts a newspaper, Red Flag, with a readership of 1.6 million. It has also started a channel on YouTube featuring video of Shii addressing parliament and other tidbits for those who want to keep up with party goings-on.

Shii said his party is willing to work within Japan’s system — he said it does not advocate immediate or violent revolution.

“We want to fix social inequities within the framework of capitalism,” Shii said. “It will take time for people to make adjustments and be ready. We aren’t advocating a sudden change to communism.”

Political analysts are split on where the communists are headed.

Tomoaki Iwai, a Nihon University political science professor, said the party’s recent popularity could be a fad.

“I don’t see a bright future for the communist party, despite the current expansion,” he said. “They are not going to gain decision-making status in Japanese politics.”

But Koichi Nakano, a political science professor at Sophia University in Tokyo, said the party serves as an important check-and-balance.

“They are a perennial opposition party, but that is a significant role,” he said. “Their ideological stance stands out in a political scene dominated by the conservatives, and it’s good to have diversity. Despite their marginal presence in parliament, the communists’ views are often considered commonsense among the public.”


Outside of parliament is where the Communist Party has been making its biggest strides.

Though weak at the national level, the communists boast more elected officials than any other party because of their strong presence in local and prefectural assemblies, where they have more than 3,000 seats.

Party members are free to devote as much, or little, of their time as they choose — from simply voting communist when elections come around to helping run social activities and youth programs.

Because of the devotion of its members, the party’s campaign machine is formidable.

And, while not expected to win big, the communists are looking at modest gains when the next parliamentary elections are held — sometime before October — because of the growing unpopularity of Prime Minister Taro Aso and his ruling Liberal Democratic Party, which is widely seen as being in disarray and unable to lead Japan out of its deepening economic recession.

The Democrats are dogged by scandals of their own. But Shii complained that the focus of the media on the potential emergence of a two-party system has created an even darker shadow from which his party must emerge.

Even so, with younger voters, the communists are doing well.

“The communists offer hope,” said Yagi, the college student. “I don’t know if I would want them to take over power, but I think they should be big enough to influence what the ruling party can do.”

He said he stopped short of actually joining up because the name of the party put him off.

“I like what the party is doing,” he said. “But ‘communism’ still carries with it a stigma, like ‘radical’ or ‘terrorist.’ I don’t want that kind of communism. I’m not a radical.”

----------------

TIME, Thursday, Jun. 28, 2007

Inside a Boutique Political Party

By Bryan Walsh/Tokyo

To her classmates, the party is something to which you bring a karaoke machine. But to Michiko Suzuki, a 19-year-old Wako University student in Tokyo, the party is the revolutionary vanguard of class struggle. Suzuki, you see, is a teenage Japanese communist. Bolshevism runs in her family. The daughter and granddaughter of party members, she joined the Japanese Communist Party (JCP) as soon as she turned 18. "The purpose of the JCP is to change Japan," says Suzuki. "If the party becomes bigger, then Japan will be changed into a place where my dreams are realized."

The idea of communists soldiering on in the world's second-largest economy more than 15 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union may invite comparisons to Japanese soldiers stranded on remote Pacific islands who thought that World War II had never ended. But the JCP is far from extinct. It claims some 400,000 members, and garnered 7.3% of the vote—from 4.92 million voters—in the most recent legislative elections in 2005. "The JCP is probably the most successful non-ruling communist party in Asia, if not the world," says Lam Peng Er, a research fellow at the National University of Singapore's East Asian Institute.

That success has it roots in the JCP's long history. Born in 1922 as the Japanese branch of the Communist International, the global federation of Marxist-Leninist parties created by Moscow, the JCP quickly adapted itself to local conditions. It was one of the few Japanese groups to stand up to the rise of imperial militarists in the run-up to World War II, and suffered as a result. "The JCP was the only political party that struggled against the past war of aggression with the sacrifice of members' lives," says JCP chairman Kazuo Shii. That principled stance earned the respect of many Japanese after the war ended, and JCP members were allowed to run for office. Though the conservative Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) would come to control Japanese politics, the JCP provided a reliable leftist opposition bloc with the larger and more mainstream Japan Socialist Party.

Today the JCP is still relevant at a time when communists in other countries have all but vanished. While the largest Japanese parties lack a clear and cohesive identity, the JCP may benefit by virtue of actually standing for something—even if what it stands for is "a socialist/communist society," as stated in its manifesto, in a decidedly capitalist country. "The JCP is a boutique party, but it's the only political party in Japan that has a strong grassroots organization," says Lam. "In a way, the communists are probably the most modern political party in Japan." Despite holding just 18 of the 722 seats in the Diet, the JCP often functions as the only genuine opposition to politics-as-usual in Tokyo. Communist politicians have repeatedly uncovered damaging financial scandals in government—they're too far removed from power to be enmeshed in Tokyo's endemic corruption. "We are the watchdog, but we go further than that," says Shii. "I think the advance of the JCP will be key to the advance of Japanese politics."

The headquarters of the JCP in Tokyo

It's hard to believe that the most progressive political force in Japan still adheres to Marxism. (When I half-seriously asked one college-aged party member whether he reads the classics, he reached into his backpack and produced Volume II of the 13-volume Japanese translation of Das Kapital.) But the JCP will likely pick up protest votes in July's legislative elections, and the party is zealously recruiting new members. "I think my friends and those around me have a lot of difficulty and hardship finding themselves, having any confidence in themselves," says Suzuki, the Wako University student. "But as a member of the JCP, I have a wider perspective on my future. I know we have possibility." Who said the war was over, comrade?

------------------

Japan's young turn to Communist Party as they decide capitalism has let them down

By Danielle Demetriou in Tokyo

With its gleaming designer stores, the world's second largest economy and an insatiable appetite for luxury labels, Japan has long been regarded as the land of the rising capitalist.

But a wave of discontent among its younger workers is fuelling a change in the nation's political landscape: communism is suddenly back in fashion.

What many young Japanese view as an erosion of their economic security and employment rights, combined with years of political stagnation, are propelling droves of them into the arms of the Japanese Communist Party (JCP), the nation's fourth largest political party.

New recruits are signing up at the rate of 1,000 a month, swelling its ranks to more than 415,000. Meanwhile a classic proletarian novel is at the top of the best-seller lists, and communist-themed "manga" comics are enjoying soaring success.


A further sign of disaffection among young Japanese - who in recent years have been more renowned for their political apathy than their revolutionary zeal - is the increasing frequency of rallies by workers on the streets of the capital.

Earlier this month, crowds of up to 5,000 young Japanese workers marched through the streets of central Tokyo to express their growing discontent with the government over working conditions.

And the job losses, financial insecurity and social dissatisfaction that are expected to go hand in hand with the current global credit crisis are expected to increase the ranks of the party further.

Spearheading the lurch to the Left are young Japanese in their twenties and thirties, who have become increasingly disillusioned with changes to employment laws which they blame for creating a climate of insecurity.

Some 44 per cent of country's workforce are part-time only, while a profusion of short-term contracts has created a generation of freelancers who are often between jobs.

Kimitoshi Morihara, deputy director of the Japanese Communist Party's international bureau, said: "Working conditions dramatically changed for younger generations in 2002 when new temporary working laws were introduced.

Today, more than one in three Japanese is in temporary work. They have almost no rights, no security and no future.

"The political climate in Japan is changing and more young Japanese are becoming politically aware because these issues have long been ignored by other parties." The revival of hard left politics comes as Japan faces the prospect of an general election in coming months, following the parliamentary deadlock which led to last month's sudden resignation of Yasuo Fukuda, the third prime minister in less than three years.

The country's schlerotic political system has enabled the ruling Liberal Democratic Party to hold power for an almost unbroken five decades, although its powers were critically curtailed last year when the main opposition party won control of the upper legislative chamber.

Resurgent Japanese communism is deploying all the tools of the 21st century, with the internet and on-line video sites playing a vital role.

The party's charismatic chairman, Kazuo Shii, triggered a rush of new recruits with a rousing parliamentary speech attacking the "exploitation" of young workers, which has become cult viewing among young Japanese on video websites.

With his grey salaryman suit and glasses, 54-year-old Mr Shii appears a far cry from conventional revolutionary stereotypes. However, after eight years at the helm of the party he has been propelled to prominence to become something of a media personality.

Among those who have recently come under his sway is Miki Tomohiro, a 34-year-old freelance writer from Fukutsu City, Fukuoka Prefecture. "When I saw Mr Shii speaking, I felt as if he was exposing capitalism in its crudest form," he said. "I surfed the internet to find out more about the party before joining." Oomori Shuji, 30, a temporary worker for Toyota, from Aichi Prefecture, who joined the party in June, added: "Since my graduation, I have never been fully employed. At a JCP workshop, I learned about the realities of temps hired by the day and the working poor, who are without social security or bonuses, and are often easily fired.

"The party is considerate of the plight of young people, including their jobs and living conditions. It has a concrete policy on these questions." Another sign of the growing allure of the Left is the
sudden surge in popularity of a classic Japanese novel, Kanikosen - the Crab-Canning Ship ­- about embattled factory workers who rise up against their capitalist oppressors.

Nearly eight decades after it was written by Takiji Kobayashi, a communist who was tortured to death for his political beliefs aged 29, its sales have leapt from a slow annual trickle of 5,000 to 507,000 so far this year, unexpectedly catapulting it to the top of the nation's bestseller lists.

A "manga" comic book depicting the same Marxist tale is also winning over young Japanese, with 200,000 copies sold in a year. Kosuke Maruo, editor at East Press, which publishes the manga version, said: "The story succeeds in representing very vividly the situation of the so-called working poor today.

"They cannot become happy and they cannot find the solution to their poverty, however hard they work. Young people who are forced to work for very low wages today may have a feeling that they are in a similar position to the crew of Kanikosen." Kyudo Takahashi, 31, a freelance
writer from Tokyo, attributed the popularity of the story to a growing sense of displacement among his generation.

"Kanikosen was a textbook in school but we didn't read it seriously then," he said. "Now, we're reading it again because we're frustrated with the government.

"In the book, people are exploited again and again. They are not treated like humans, more like cows at a hamburger factory. That is how many people feel today. When we find work, someone is always exploiting us. We cannot feel secure about the future."

(from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/3218944/Japans-young-turn-to-Communist-Party-as-they-decide-capitalism-has-let-them-down.html)

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Prakash Karat on Elections 2009


"A Communist Party must face many ups and downs in the course of developing the Party and movement. An election reverse should not demoralise us. We should go to the people with the confidence that we can rally them around the Left platform. The people of the country expect the CPI(M), as the biggest contingent of the Left, to steer a course that will provide an alternative to the current ruling order. In order to so, the Party has to strengthen Left unity and gather other secular and democratic forces by drawing them into joint action. A common platform must emerge from which to defend national sovereignty, secularism and fight for alternative economic policies."

Says Prakash Karat in his new article "On the Lok Sabha Election Results: Reviewing the Party’s Performance" published in The Marxist.

Read it here...

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Poverty of will: On Budget 2009-10

My Frontline article on social sector expenditures in Budget 2009-10 is at:

http://www.flonnet.com/fl2615/stories/20090731261501500.htm


Poverty of will

R. RAMAKUMAR

The new UPA government’s first Budget is marked by the absence of strong commitment to raise social sector spending.

Read on...

Monday, July 13, 2009

Karthikeyan began talks on Cancer Hospital










Exclusive: Former Kerala minister sought Lavalin favour

Shafi Rahman

New Delhi, July 10, 2009

Former Congress Minister G. Karthikeyan had sought quid-pro-quo assistance from the Canadian authorities for setting up a hospital for granting a project for refurbishment of Pallivasal, Shengulam and Panniyar Hydro electric stations in Kerala.

A letter written to Klaus Triendl, accused in the Lavalin scandal and then vice-president of Lavalin business operations, a copy of which is in possession of India Today, was shot off to assist Triendl’s discussions with the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) for availing the assistance.


The Congress so far had accused the CPI(M) of entering into quid-pr-quo agreement with the Lavalin for setting up a Cancer Hospital. The letter reveals that then UDF Government had also made efforts to get into such an agreement with Lavalin.

Interestingly, apart from the hospital, Karthikeyan went ahead and sought assistance for technical training college, water treatment plant, potable water system and rehabilitation of roads in the area. Karthikeyan’s letter was received by Lavalin’s corporate secretariat on March 28, 1996. The CBI, which looked into the case, had received rap from the Court for downplaying the part of the Congress leader in scandal.

Source: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=51179&sectionid=4&Itemid=1&issueid=114

(Keywords: ലാവലിന്‍ , കാര്‍ത്തികേയന്‍ , പിണറായി വിജയന്‍ , അഴിമതി)

Shame on Mathrubhumi: The Lie on Thomas Isaac

I am truly amazed at a box item report that has appeared in Mathrubhumi today (Saturday, 11th July 2009) on a "secret visit" by T. M. Thomas Isaac to Mumbai (for those who have not read it, please see below). The report says that he was in Mumbai to influence the central committee members from Maharashtra in favour of Pinarayi Vijayan. For those, who still do not believe that news reports are manufactured against CPM leaders, this is a good case study.


The report is nothing but a huge lie. I am sitting amazed at (a) the ability of the reporter to write something that he knows is untrue; (b) the extent of his imagination; and (c) the new lows to which a paper like Mathrubhumi can stoop to tarnish CPM leaders.

Thomas Isaac was in Mumbai not to secretly meet any leader here, but to receive his daughter Sara, who was landing in Mumbai from the US. He reached Mumbai late in the night on Thursday (9th). Mumbai airport officials transported him to the International Terminal, where he received his daughter at about 1 AM on Friday (10th). He moved with his two daughters to the TISS guest house in Chembur where his accomodation was arranged and all of them, tired as they were, slept till late in the morning. He ordered food at his room for lunch. Post-lunch, he was continously working with some of us on a book that he is completing, and which is to be published by Sage Publications this month. He did not even move out of his room till dinner time, when he was joined by four friends of his. Post-dinner, he went to his room and slept. He went to Delhi by an early morning flight today (11th). At no point, did he even come out of his guest house room. The only visitor he had in the day was the Director of TISS, who had dropped in for a courtesy visit.

At about 2 PM, one friend of mine in Mumbai received a phone call from N. Sreejith, the Mathrubhumi staff reporter in Mumbai. He asked if Thomas Isaac is in Mumbai, to which the person, smelling fish, replied "not in my knowledge". The conversation ended. The next thing that we know is this news item!! Here is a father who comes to receive his daughter and lands in a trouble like this.

The persons in Maharashtra referred to in the news item (Ashok Dhawale, Kumar Shiralkar and KL Bajaj) were in a train to New Delhi when Isaac arrived in Mumbai. This reporter does not even have the basic commmon sense to find out if they were in Mumbai or not for the "secret meeting". Ashok Dhawale has already issued a statement in this regard.

The courage that Mathrubhumi had to figure out that he was in Mumbai, try to trace him and, on failure to trace, write a big lie like this is so totally shameful. In any other decent newspaper, this reporter would be expected to be axed the next day. But not in Mathrubhumi, where the story line is given directly from the top. The paper will not even apologise tomorrow, and in any case, the purpose has been served (on the hot dog error, Deshabhimani had so graciously apologised).

WHAT A SHAME ON KERALA MEDIA!

മാതൃഭൂമി, ഹാ ലജ്ജാകരം

ആര്‍ . രാംകുമാര്‍

മുംബൈയില്‍ തോമസ് ഐസക്കിന്റെ 'രഹസ്യസന്ദര്‍ശനം' എന്ന 'മാതൃഭൂമി' പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ച ബോക്സ് വാര്‍ത്ത എന്നെ അത്ഭുതസ്തബ്ധനാക്കി. പിണറായി വിജയന് അനുകൂലമായി പാര്‍ടി കേന്ദ്രകമ്മിറ്റി അംഗങ്ങളെ സ്വാധീനിക്കാന്‍ ഐസക് മുംബൈയില്‍ എത്തിയെന്നാണ് മാതൃഭൂമി വാര്‍ത്തയില്‍ പറയുന്നത്. സിപിഐ എം നേതാക്കള്‍ക്ക് എതിരായി വാര്‍ത്തകള്‍ നിര്‍മിക്കപ്പെടുന്നെന്ന് ഇനിയും വിശ്വസിക്കാത്തവര്‍ക്ക് ഇതൊരു നല്ല പാഠമാണ്.


ഈ റിപ്പോര്‍ട്ട് മറ്റൊന്നുമല്ല, പക്ഷേ വലിയൊരു നുണയാണ്. വെറുമൊരു നുണയല്ല, എന്നെ അതിശയിപ്പിച്ച സംഗതികള്‍ ഇവയാണ്;

(1) കള്ളമാണെന്ന് തനിക്കുതന്നെ ബോധ്യമുള്ള ഒരുകാര്യം എഴുതാനുള്ള റിപ്പോര്‍ട്ടറുടെ കഴിവ്;
(2) അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെ സാങ്കല്‍പ്പികശേഷി;
(3) സിപിഐ എം നേതാക്കളെ കരിതേച്ചു കാണിക്കാന്‍ മാതൃഭൂമിപോലുള്ള ഒരു പത്രം ഇത്രയും തരംതാഴുന്നത്.

ഐസക് മുംബൈയില്‍ വന്നത് രഹസ്യമായി ഏതെങ്കിലും നേതാവിനെ കാണാനല്ല, മറിച്ച് അമേരിക്കയില്‍നിന്നു വന്ന തന്റെ മകള്‍ സാറായെ സ്വീകരിക്കാനാണ്. ജൂലൈ ഒമ്പതിന് രാത്രി വൈകിയാണ് അദ്ദേഹം മുംബൈയില്‍ എത്തിയത്. മുംബൈ വിമാനത്താവള അധികൃതര്‍ അദ്ദേഹത്തെ രാജ്യാന്തര ടെര്‍മിനലിലേക്ക് കടത്തിവിട്ടു, പത്തിനു പുലര്‍ച്ചെ ഒന്നോടെ അദ്ദേഹം അവിടെവച്ച് തന്റെ മകളെ വരവേല്‍ക്കുകയും ചെയ്തു. തുടര്‍ന്ന് തന്റെ രണ്ടു പെണ്‍മക്കളുമായി ഐസക് ചെമ്പൂരിലെ ടാറ്റാ ഇന്‍സ്റ്റിറ്റ്യൂട്ട് ഓഫ് സോഷ്യല്‍ സയന്‍സസി (ടിഐഎസ്എസ്)ലേക്ക് പോയി, അവിടെയാണ് താമസസൌകര്യം ഒരുക്കിയിരുന്നത്. ക്ഷീണിതരായിരുന്ന അവര്‍ ഉടന്‍തന്നെ ഉറങ്ങുകയും ചെയ്തു. രാവിലെ വൈകിയാണ് എഴുന്നേറ്റത്. മുറിയില്‍ത്തന്നെ ഉച്ചഭക്ഷണം കൊണ്ടുവരാന്‍ ഐസക് ഏര്‍പ്പാട് ചെയ്തു. ഉച്ചഭക്ഷണത്തിനുശേഷം, ഈ മാസം സേജ് പബ്ളിക്കേഷന്‍സ് പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിക്കുന്ന അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെ പുസ്തകത്തിനുവേണ്ടി ഐസക് ഞങ്ങളില്‍ ചിലരുമായി ചേര്‍ന്ന് ജോലിയില്‍ മുഴുകി. അത്താഴത്തിനായി തന്റെ നാലു സുഹൃത്തുക്കള്‍ എത്തുന്നതുവരെ അദ്ദേഹം മുറിക്കു പുറത്തുപോയില്ല. അത്താഴത്തിനുശേഷം ഐസക് മുറിയിലേക്ക് പോയി ഉറങ്ങി. ഒരിക്കല്‍പോലും ഐസക് ഗസ്റ്റ്‌ഹൌസിലെ തന്റെ മുറിയുടെ പുറത്തുവന്നിട്ടില്ല. അന്നേദിവസം അദ്ദേഹത്തെ സന്ദര്‍ശിച്ച ഏക വ്യക്തി ടിഐഎസ്എസ് ഡയറക്ടര്‍ ഡോ. പരശുരാമനാണ്.

പകല്‍ രണ്ടോടെ മുംബൈയിലുള്ള ഒരു സുഹൃത്തിനെ മുംബൈ സ്റ്റാഫ് ലേഖകന്‍ എന്‍ ശ്രീജിത് ഫോണില്‍ വിളിച്ചു. തോമസ് ഐസക് മുംബൈയില്‍ എത്തിയിട്ടുണ്ടോ എന്ന് ശ്രീജിത് ചോദിച്ചു. സംശയം മണത്ത സുഹൃത്ത് 'എന്റെ അറിവില്‍ ഇല്ല' എന്ന മറുപടി നല്‍കി. സംഭാഷണം അവസാനിക്കുകയും ചെയ്തു. പിറ്റേന്ന് ഈ പത്രറിപ്പോര്‍ട്ടാണ് ഞങ്ങള്‍ കണ്ടത്! മകളെ സ്വീകരിക്കാന്‍ വന്ന പിതാവാണ് ഇത്തരത്തില്‍ ചിത്രീകരിക്കപ്പെട്ടത്.

പത്രവാര്‍ത്തയില്‍ പരാമര്‍ശിക്കുന്ന മഹാരാഷ്ട്രക്കാര്‍ (അശോക് ധാവ്ളെ, കുമാര്‍ ശിരാല്‍ക്കാര്‍, കെ എല്‍ ബജാജ്) ഐസക് മുംബൈയില്‍ എത്തിയപ്പോള്‍ ന്യൂഡല്‍ഹിയിലേക്കുള്ള ട്രെയിനിലായിരുന്നു. 'രഹസ്യ കൂടിക്കാഴ്ചയ്ക്കായി' ഈ വ്യക്തികള്‍ മുംബൈയിലുണ്ടോ എന്ന് അന്വേഷിക്കാനുള്ള അടിസ്ഥാനപരമായ സാമാന്യബോധംപോലും മാതൃഭൂമി ലേഖകന്‍ കാട്ടിയില്ല. ഇക്കാര്യം സംബന്ധിച്ച് അശോക് ധാവ്ളെ ഇതിനകം പ്രസ്താവന പുറപ്പെടുവിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ട്. ഐസക്കിനെ മുംബൈയില്‍ കണ്ടെത്താന്‍ ശ്രമിക്കാനും അത് പരാജയപ്പെട്ടപ്പോള്‍ ഇത്തരമൊരു വലിയ നുണ വാര്‍ത്തയായി പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിക്കാനും മാതൃഭൂമി കാട്ടിയ ധൈര്യം അങ്ങേയറ്റം ലജ്ജാകരമാണ്.

മാന്യതയുള്ള ഏതു പത്രവും പിറ്റേന്ന് ഈ ലേഖകനെ പുറത്താക്കിയേനേ. പക്ഷേ, വന്‍ പ്രാധാന്യത്തോടെ വാര്‍ത്ത പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ച മാതൃഭൂമി അങ്ങനെ ചെയ്തില്ല. പിറ്റേദിവസം ഒരു ഖേദപ്രകടനം നടത്താന്‍പോലും ആ പത്രം തയ്യാറായില്ല, ഏതുവിധത്തിലും അവരുടെ ലക്ഷ്യം നിറവേറ്റുകയും ചെയ്തു (ഹോട്ട് ഡോഗ് പ്രശ്നത്തില്‍ 'ദേശാഭിമാനി' അന്തസ്സോടെ ഖേദം പ്രകടിപ്പിച്ചു). മാധ്യമങ്ങളുടെ അവസ്ഥ എത്ര ലജ്ജാകരമാണ്.

----------------------


Sunday, July 12, 2009

IMAGINED CORRUPTION: FACTS IN THE SNC-LAVALIN CONTROVERSY


M. A. Baby

The permission accorded by the Governor of Kerala, R. S. Gavai, to prosecute Pinarayi Vijayan, the Kerala State Secretary of the CPI (M), in the SNC-Lavalin case has been criticised widely for its constitutional impropriety and bias. Given that a senior leader of the CPI (M) has been accused of “corruption”, national and local media have given wide coverage to this case.

What is extraordinary about the Lavalin case is that while it is called a “corruption case”, no one, including the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), has claimed that Pinarayi Vijayan financially benefited from the contract. In essence, it is a “corruption case without corruption.” I would argue in this article that the SNC-Lavalin controversy is yet another example of public controversies generated against the CPI (M) by an anti-CPI (M) clique, which includes a section of the mass media in Kerala as well as the United Democratic Front (UDF) leaders. The Lavalin controversy began in 2004 on the basis of alleged remarks in a confidential draft of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s (CAG) Inspection Report. These remarks were selectively leaked to the media and a cloud of corruption was sought to be created around CPI (M) leaders, particularly Pinarayi Vijayan, who was the Minister for Electricity between 1996 and 1999 in the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government. A careful examination of the facts in the case will reveal the hollowness of many arguments related to the case.

THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT

Pallivasal (1940-41), Sengulam (1954-55) and Panniyar (1963-64) are among the first generation hydro-electric projects in Kerala. By the 1990s, having outlived their normal age and due to heavy maintenance, the full capacity of these plants could not be utilised. The UDF government decided in 1995 to replace the existing machinery and upgrade and modernise these power projects. For this purpose, the UDF chose the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) route instead of calling global tenders.

Accordingly, a MoU was signed with SNC-Lavalin, a Canadian engineering and consultancy firm, on August 10, 1995 by C. V. Padmarajan, the then Minister for Electricity in the UDF government. As per this MoU, the Export Development Corporation (EDC) of Canada agreed “to provide a financing package for the supply of Canadian goods and services” for the upgradation of Pallivasal-Sengulam-Panniyar projects (hereafter PSP projects).

Later on, Padmarajan’s successor G. Karthikeyan, the new Minister for Electricity in the UDF government under A. K. Antony, visited Canada on February 24, 1996 and signed an agreement for the provision of services of SNC-Lavalin “for Management, Engineering, Procurement and Construction Supervision so as to ensure the timely completion of the project within the agreed time frame of three years…” Besides, it was also stipulated in the agreement that the Annexure documents were also an integral part of the contract. Annexure B of the agreement provided the list of “Canadian financed Goods and Services,” their prices and an estimate of the overall cost to be financed by Canadian export credit.

LDF GOVERNMENT’S EFFORTS

When the LDF returned to power in May 1996, the power situation in Kerala had reached crisis proportions. The State was going through three-and-a-half hours of load shedding for domestic consumers and 95 per cent power cut for industries. The Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) was facing a major financial crisis. In such a scenario, the LDF government took measures to complete the ongoing projects on war footing. It also initiated a few new projects. As a result, when the term of the LDF government ended in May 2001, the installed capacity of power generation in the State had increased by 1083.6 MW as against the previous UDF government’s achievement of a paltry 14 MW. With load shedding and power cut totally withdrawn by the end of LDF government term, Kerala could claim to be self-sufficient in power in 2001.

A key feature of the LDF government’s approach was the insistence on a transparent process of procurement. Not a single project initiated during the LDF period was taken up under the MoU route or contracted to MNCs. Open tenders were called for Athirapally hydro-electric project (163 MW) and Kuttiyadi Additional Extension (100 MW) scheme, which were initiated by the LDF government. The Kozhikode thermal project was also tendered and was executed by BHEL. In contrast, under earlier UDF regime, not a single power project was contracted through open tender, including the now controversial PSP projects. Further, most of these projects were contracted to MNCs.

LIMITED OPTIONS

After the formation of the government in 1996, the LDF ministry faced a question: What was to be done with regard to the projects initiated through MoU route by the erstwhile UDF government? Most of the thermal projects, for which the UDF had already signed MoUs and power purchase agreements (PPAs), had not been initiated. In the case of the Neryamangalam and Sabari hydel projects, the LDF government decided to ignore the MoUs and go for a fresh global tender. In the case of Neryamangalam power project (25 MW), for which UDF had signed a MoU with the Swedish multinational company ABB, the MNC went to court resulting in the project being held up for five years. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of ABB.

However, in the case of the controversial PSP projects that we are discussing, a MoU as well as an agreement were signed with SNC-Lavalin by the UDF government. As per the terms of the agreement, only the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris could arbitrate disputes. Given the advanced stage of negotiations and terms of the signed agreement, the LDF government decided to go ahead with the package that was drawn up by the UDF government.

Accordingly, a ministerial team headed by the chief minister E. K. Nayanar and Electricity Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, along with KSEB officials, visited Canada in October 1996 to hold discussions with SNC-Lavalin and the Canadian government agencies. As a result of these negotiations, the LDF government was successful in lowering a number of charges included in the agreements between SNC-Lavalin and the UDF government. The details are given in Table 1.


The last component in Table 1 – the grant – was to be arranged by SNC-Lavalin from different Canadian aid agencies for setting up a modern cancer hospital (the Malabar Cancer Centre, MCC) in Malabar. Subsequently, on July 6, 1998, two addendums to the original agreement were signed for the supply of Canadian goods and spare parts on the basis of the fixed prices already indicated in Annexure B of the agreement entered in February 1996.

THE CRITICISMS

A number of criticisms have now come up in the media, as well as in the CBI charge sheet, on the procedures followed by the LDF government in signing the agreement. The main arguments are the following:

1. The decision for upgradation was made in contravention of the advice given by the Central Electricity Authority (CEA) and was also done without a pre-feasibility study;

2. The E. Balanandan Committee’s recommendation against going in for comprehensive upgradation of the above projects was ignored by the LDF government;

3. The LDF government disregarded the offer from the public sector BHEL and chose the Canadian MNC, which quoted a higher rate than BHEL for the contract;

4. The LDF government converted a mere consultancy agreement entered into by the UDF government into a supply order agreement, without going for a global tender.

First, the critics of the LDF ignore the simple basic fact that it was the UDF government that took the decision for upgradation, chose SNC-Lavalin as the agency for implementation under the MoU route and entered into an agreement with them. It must be admitted that the choice for upgradation or maintenance or some other option is a techno-economic choice and there can be genuine differences of opinion. The consensus within the KSEB was for upgradation. Whatever be the reason, the choice was made by the UDF.

Secondly, the E. Balanandan Committee was appointed by the LDF government to suggest measures to improve the functioning of the KSEB, short-term steps to manage the power crisis and a long-term policy for the acceleration of power generation. The Committee had submitted its report on February 2, 1997, by which time the negotiations with the Canadian agencies for the PSP project had reached an irreversibly advanced stage. It may be noted that most of the other recommendations of the Committee were subsequently accepted and implemented by the government.

Thirdly, it is a brazen lie that the LDF government had ignored a lower quotation offered by BHEL and chosen to give the contract to a MNC. As noted earlier, the MoU route and the foreign consultant were chosen by the UDF government. The so-called lower offer from the BHEL is only a figment of imagination; this fact was confirmed by a written reply in the state legislature by the UDF’s Electricity Minister Kadavoor Sivadasan on October 23, 2001. The rejection of an offer from BHEL being referred to was not for the PSP projects, but for the Kuttiyadi project during the UDF rule between 1991 and 1996.

Fourthly, the most serious charge is that the UDF government had signed only a mere consultancy agreement with SNC-Lavalin, while the LDF government chose to sign a supply order with them without going for a global tender.

It is a well-known fact that the MoU route with bilateral financial assistance precludes procurement through global tender. In fact, the contract entered between KSEB and SNC-Lavalin on February 24, 1996 (during the UDF regime) was a contract that also included the supply of Canadian goods and services, in addition to providing Technical Services. There was no further addition to the scope of work during the LDF government’s period. Annexure B of the Contract Agreement (dated February 24, 1996) provides evidence for this. In this Annexure B, it is mentioned that:

Meetings and discussions with EDC (Export Development Corporation) of Canada have established preliminary agreement that funding can be made available to finance the supply of Canadian sourced goods and services. The value of proposed financing has been tentatively agreed on the basis of an estimate prepared by SNC-Lavalin.

Thus, the agreement of February 24, 1996 was a fixed price contract, and the subsequent LDF government was faced with a fait accompli from which there was no scope for backtracking. All that could have been done was to reduce the cost of goods and services, which the LDF government succeeded in doing (see Table 1).

PRICE COMPARISONS AND IMAGINARY LOSSES

A question that remains is whether the pricing in the contract of $ 59.95 million (Canadian dollars) was excessive or not. These prices were fixed on the basis of rates proposed by a consultant appointed by the UDF government. The minutes of the Kerala State Electricity Board meeting also indicate that the Export Development Corporation, Canada had indeed taken price offers from qualified Canadian companies before the agreed prices were finalised. The UDF government accepted these prices as part of the February 1996 agreement. The subsequent addendum signed during the LDF period was in line with this original agreement of February 1996.

It may also be mentioned that the KSEB had to enter into such a financial arrangement in the context of (a) an acute financial crunch; and (b) the high costs of domestic borrowing due to the wrong policies of the Central government. Further, the LDF government had appointed the National Hydro Power Corporation (NHPC) as a consultant to verify the costs. The estimate given by SNC-Lavalin was certified as reasonable and comparable to international prices by the NHPC.

Critics of the LDF have repeatedly made price comparisons with the costs per unit of MW in the Neryamangalam hydel upgradation project and the SNC-Lavalin project. As per the so-called CAG audit report, the cost in the former was only Rs 1.07 per MW as against Rs 2.24 per MW in the latter for the PSP projects. Based on this cost comparison, it is alleged that the SNC-Lavalin derived undue benefit of Rs 110 crore and that the state exchequer suffered losses to that extent. It may be noted that the comparison is being made between two non-comparable parameters. While the scope of work in the Neriyamangalam project included only the rewinding of generators and some other minor replacements, the PSP project required the replacement of the entire machinery and equipment including generators, turbines and the control systems. The cost per MW for the latter would be higher than the former in any case.

The high voltage slander campaign against the CPI (M) seeks to project that CAG has found a loss of Rs 374 crore to the State of Kerala from the Lavalin-PSP projects. It offends commonsense to argue that the project with an outlay of Rs 259 crore resulted in a loss of Rs 374 crore. This bombastic figure has been reached by including the so-called opportunity cost of the energy forgone due to the delay in commissioning of the project, exaggerated figures of excess payment for machinery arrived on the basis of cost calculations of non-comparable hydel renovation projects and so on. Many of these allegations would not have found place even in the audit report of the CAG, if the KSEB and the Electricity Department had given proper and timely responses to audit queries.

MoU v/s GLOBAL TENDER: THE UDF’s ADMISSION

G. Karthikeyan, the Electricity Minister in the UDF ministry who had signed the 1996 agreement, admitted while participating in a debate in the state assembly that the contract was a package and global tenders could not have been invited. In fact, when Karthikeyan became a Minister midway through the UDF regime, a MoU and “consultancy” agreement had already been signed with SNC-Lavalin by his predecessor C V Padmarajan for the extension of Kuttiyadi hydroelectric project. Addendum agreements for the supply of goods for the Kuttiyadi extension scheme were signed by Karthikeyan on 24 February 1996, and on the same day, the “consultancy” agreement for PSP projects was also signed. The ex-UDF minister admitted in the assembly that he had no option but to go for global tender in the Kuttiyadi project.

THE QUALITY OF EQUIPMENTS

There have been criticisms that the equipments supplied by SNC-Lavalin were not of high quality and some of them have been faulty. We cannot comment on these criticisms for lack of full knowledge. However, what is to be remembered is that the final payments for supply of machinery, made to SNC-Lavalin, were released during the tenure of the UDF government (2001-2006) that followed the LDF government (1996-2001). The then UDF government should have ensured that the machinery and the equipments were as per the terms of agreement and fully operational before the final settlement of payment was made.

The criticism that the expenditure on renovation was rendered wasteful due to the non-achievement of pre-renovation generation levels is also baseless. The UDF’s Electricity Minister, in an answer to a question on the floor of the state assembly on July 22, 2005, stated that the installed capacity of the PSP project was 114 MW and the installed capacity after renovation was 125 MW. It may also be true that the full capacity of the project was not utilised during the initial period after renovation because of teething troubles as well as inevitable gestation periods of new machinery and fluctuations in water flows.

Another criticism is that the project, which had to be completed by 2001, was completed only in 2003. Some critics have even attempted to calculate the opportunity cost of the energy production forgone and added it to the alleged loss incurred as a result of the Lavalin deal. Again, the UDF’s Electricity Minister himself clarified the reasons for the delay in completion of the project in the state assembly on February 10, 2005: “in the case of Pallivasal-Sengulam-Panniar projects,…since these were renovation projects, there were certain unexpected hurdles while dismantling old machinery and installing the new machinery and also there were delays in procuring certain equipments within India, (and) there occurred a short time overrun. Nevertheless all these problems have been overcome and the projects completed.”

THE MALABAR CANCER CENTER

Finally, we shall take up the controversy regarding the Malabar Cancer Centre (MCC), which was to be setup with the grant from Canadian aid agencies. Canada and many other developed countries have been using their foreign aid grants as an incentive to procure commercial deals and supply orders for their MNCs. With respect to Kuttiyadi project also, which was entirely finalised by the UDF government of 1991-96, there was a grant component, which was to be utilised for strengthening the electricity distribution system in Malabar. From the beginning of the negotiation process for the PSP project by the UDF government too, the grant component was a subject of discussion. The grant component initially proposed was Rs 46 crore, i.e., equivalent to 30 per cent of the project cost for educational/health/environmental schemes in the project region (see Table 1). During the ministerial level negotiations in October 1996, the issue of grant was discussed and it was decided that a cancer hospital would be setup in Malabar with Canadian grant.

SNC-Lavalin prepared a project proposal for the cancer hospital with an outlay of Rs 103 crore. The government of Kerala was to contribute Rs 5 crore towards land and related infrastructure development. The remaining Rs 98 crore was to be a grant from Canadian aid agencies. Representatives of CIDA and the Quebec provincial government had participated in the discussions on Malabar Cancer Centre (MCC). The government entered into a MoU with SNC-Lavalin, according to which the latter was to be a consultant to the project and also arrange the necessary grants from Canadian agencies. The MoU was to be converted into an agreement on the basis of further consultations. In short, the discussion regarding the grant was a fully transparent process in continuation of the original UDF agreement with SNC-Lavalin and was initiated on the basis of a cabinet decision.

The MCC has now become a topic of major controversy because the promised Canadian aid has not yet materialised fully. The launch of the hospital project was delayed due to the unexpected fall out of Pokhran nuclear test, after which foreign aid to India dried up significantly. Nevertheless, nearly Rs 15 crore of Canadian grant was received and the first phase of the construction and establishment of MCC was completed.

This was the stage when the UDF came to power – in 2001. The UDF was not enthusiastic about implementing the hospital project for political reasons and neglected the follow up to the MoU so that it could be converted into an agreement. Not only was the MoU not converted into an agreement, but the MoU itself was also not renewed and allowed to lapse. The UDF government failed to send even a letter of appreciation for the completion of the first phase, which could have been used by SNC-Lavalin to arrange additional funds. The SNC-Lavalin took the position that establishing the hospital was a joint venture and that the Kerala government also had to actively collaborate with them in lobbying for Canadian aid. In a letter in December 2002 to the then Chief Minister A. K. Antony, SNC-Lavalin had requested (a) more frequent meetings and consultations; (b) signing of the draft agreement for the hospital; (c) a joint communication campaign; and (d) speeding up of the civil works. Kerala government did not even give a formal response to this letter. Consequent to the new policy of government of India regarding receipt of foreign aid, the then Canadian High Commissioner informed the Government of Kerala that Canada could no more provide aid to official agencies like the government. The Government of Kerala failed to respond and inform the High Commissioner that the Government of India’s new policy was applicable only to new aid programmes and not to ongoing programmes.

Needless to say, all the wild charges of siphoning of hospital funds by the CPI (M) are totally baseless. Canadian aid could only be routed to agencies agreed up on in the MoU, and by following FCRA regulations. The Technicalia Consultants, Chennai was given the contract for the construction of the hospital and the Canadian aid for the expenditure incurred was directly paid to them. As per Government of India’s order No.11/21022/94(506)/2000-FCRA.IV (dated April 26, 2001), the Ministry of Home Affairs had regularised the payment of Rs 13 crore made for the hospital project. There has been nothing irregular regarding the utilisation of the grant that has so far been received. It may also be noted that Malabar Cancer Centre Society, which was formed as per the decision of the state cabinet, has the Chief Minister as the Chairman of the Governing Council.

It appears that the enthusiasm of SNC-Lavalin, which had agreed to arrange for the grant, waned after sometime. It is said that they were unwilling to take up a commitment for finance under an enforceable contract. The CPI (M) does not hold any brief for the action or non-action of SNC-Lavalin. However, the role of the UDF in scuttling the MCC project has been thoroughly exposed. They had failed to effectively pursue the issue because of political reasons. The CPI (M) had publicly criticised the UDF government’s inaction a number of times. In the background of mounting criticism, even the leading anti-Communist daily Malayala Manorama wrote an editorial in 2002 criticising the UDF government for politicising the hospital issue. The failure to ensure the take-off of the hospital is a major emotional issue and source of resentment in Malabar, for which the UDF government is to be blamed.

THE POLITICAL CONTEXT TO THE CASE

The UDF in Kerala has raked up the Lavalin case for explicit political objectives. Soon after the UDF government came to power in 2001, a number of UDF MLAs submitted a memorandum to the then Chief Minister A. K. Antony demanding the institution of a vigilance inquiry into the Lavalin deal. The Subject Committee of the Assembly for Irrigation and Power also discussed the issue. After long discussions, the Subject Committee – with UDF majority – did not make any recommendation but left it to the Chairman to take appropriate action. It took the UDF leadership eight months to order a vigilance inquiry in March 2003. The decision was clearly politically motivated.

The Director of Vigilance submitted his report in February 2006. On the basis of its findings, cases were registered against eight officers of the KSEB. The vigilance report specifically cleared Pinarayi Vijayan of any wrongdoing as Minister of Electricity. The report also noted that the original MoU signed in 1995 was not based on any feasibility report and the subsequent consultancy agreements signed in February 1996 were based on a dubious feasibility report. The UDF was in power and G. Karthikeyan of the Congress party was the Minister for Electricity.

Unhappy with the vigilance report clearing Pinarayi Vijayan, the then Chief Minister Oommen Chandy took a cabinet decision to hand over the case to the CBI in March 2006. Strangely, the CBI’s charge sheet named Pinarayi Vijayan as a participant in criminal conspiracy and made him the 9th accused in the case. Interestingly, G. Karthikeyan was not named as an accused.

As Pinarayi Vijayan was a public servant during the case, the CBI requested the Kerala Governor R. S. Gavai for permission to prosecute. On the Governor’s reference, the State government sent the details of the CBI’s application to the Advocate General (AG) C. P. Sudhakara Prasad. The AG’s advice to the government was clear: the details provided by the CBI do not provide any prima facie evidence to show that Pinarayi Vijayan was part of a criminal conspiracy. Excerpts from the AG’s advice to the State government are worth quoting:

While it is mentioned at many places in the CBI report that it was G. Karthikeyan who initiated the criminal conspiracy, the report also says that there is no evidence against him. If we examine the case on this basis, the conspiracy case against all the alleged conspirators becomes weak. As the CBI report itself is saying that there is no evidence against the person who initiated the conspiracy, the alleged conspiracy itself does not legally stand…

…The CBI report says that G. Karthikeyan was exonerated because there was no evidence to show that he financially benefited from the deal. Applying the same criterion, Pinarayi Vijayan should also have been exonerated, as there is no evidence for his benefiting financially from the deal also.

On the basis of the AG’s advice, the State cabinet decided not to accord permission to the CBI to prosecute Pinarayi Vijayan, and accordingly informed the Governor of its decision. In normal course, the Governor should have accepted the advice of the cabinet or should have returned it to the cabinet with comments. However, in a strange turn of events, the Governor put on the jacket of a detective and summoned more information from the CBI. On the basis of his discussions with CBI officials, the Governor gave a letter directly to the CBI according permission to prosecute Pinarayi Vijayan.

The above decision of the Governor, a political appointee of the central government, has given rise to protest in constitutional and legal circles. As Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer noted in his article in The Hindu,

The rule democracy implies is that the Governor is the ceremonial head and real power of administration remains with the Council of Ministers. To assume, as the Opposition in Kerala does, that the Governor has the free and indiscriminate discretion to substitute his judgment for that of the Cabinet is a grave outrage. Can a Governor assume all executive power and refuse to sign legislation passed by the legislature and negative judicial decisions? Then, our Constitution will be reduced to paper tyranny. The implications of the Governor being treated as vested with absolute power are dangerous.

This is where the Lavalin saga is now. The CBI case and the Governor’s action are aimed at sustaining a smokescreen of corruption to politically malign the CPI (M), at least till the next Assembly elections in 2011. The CPI (M) has stated that the case is politically motivated and that it would deal with the case “politically and legally.”