Loading Posts...


BENGAL ELECTION COMMISSION FED UP By Ashis Biswas Now Mamata’s Trinamool Congress rigs even municipal elections! When it comes to centre-state relations, no party in India provokes New Delhi more than the Trinamool Congress (TMC). Its anti-Centre attitude often leads to pathological extremes of political intolerance. Nor is the TMC’s antipathy restricted to only the BJP because it is ruling the Centre. The Congress and the Left forces fare no better. These days, the TMC is chummy only with the equally unpredictable Aam Aadmi Party. However, it would be wise not to set too much store by this. Only a few months ago, senior TMC leader and Minister Subrata Mukherjee had stressed that parties like the AAP belong to the “here today, gone tomorrow” category. TMC Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had put it more succinctly: “AAP, baap re baap!” she had said. Almost daily, the TMC attacks the Centre for its “ruthless exploitation” of West Bengal, its alleged lack of adequate funding for state projects, its “use of the CBI and other investigating agencies to hound political opponents”. A brief examination of these allegations would expose their utter hollowness. The fact is, the Centre collects no more than its annual interest from Bengal, on huge loans the state had incurred earlier. Delhi has not announced a moratorium on the principle. By the TMC’s logic, nationalised banks that urge upon their borrowers, big or small, to repay their loans taken, can be accused of “exploitation”. The CBI was entrusted to probe the multi-crore Saradha chit fund scam, India’s worst chit fund scandal, in which the involvement of top TMC leaders is an established fact, on an order passed by the Supreme Court. The TMC had tried its best to block the CBI and the ED from coming in, spending over Rs 12 crore of taxpayers’ money in a costly, and unsuccessful, legal wrangle. For a debt-ridden state, many found the state’s financial policies and priorities somewhat odd. Given this backdrop, it causes no surprise that the TMC finds it hard to get along with institutions like the National Human Rights Commission, the Election Commission, (at Central and state levels) the National Commission for Women, whose autonomy is by the Constitution defined. The TMC, guided solely by its only one and only leader Mamata Banerjee, has been characteristically embroiled in bitter controversies with each of these bodies. net result: the head of the HR body is Delhi has been forced to resign over an alleged sexual harassment case where the complainant mysteriously refused to come forward. The HR body in the state is currently headed by a former police chief and hardly functions these days. As for the NCW, its chairpersons have repeatedly complained of the non-co-operation of the West Bengal government in reporting/investigating rapes, gang rapes and other gender-related misdemeanours. In fact the TMC government does not even send regular annual reports on crimes, major incidents and the law and order situation to the National Crime Bureau, unlike other states. The TMC has frequently clashed with the State Election Commission, usually headed by former officials retired from work, for the sake of maintaining their autonomous status. Until recently, Ms Banerjee’s running battle with former SEC Ms Mira Pandey, over issues like police postings, force deployments, phases of polling etc, usually extended to the Supreme Court, with Ms Pandey mostly winning on points. But Ms Banerjee has a formidable reputation as a bad loser and Ms Pandey’s tenure was not exactly trouble-free. With Pandey’s successor, Mr Sushantaranjan Upadhyay, a retired former WBCS officer, the TMC was on firmer ground. The new EC went along with the TMC in most cases, (living up to his name, apparently) until recently. This was good for a snigger among opposition parties in Bengal and political analysts. Yet, over the seemingly minor matter of holding pending civic elections at Bally, Rajarhat, Asansol and Siliguri, even the mild-mannered Upadhyay felt he had to resign in a hurry, even before the police process had been completed! The reason: as he put it, he was put ‘under pressure’ by ruling party politicians, who virtually gheraoed him for over four hours in the name of sending a deputation. The ‘deputation’ consisted of several senior Ministers, who had brought with them large numbers of slogan shouting youths who surrounded the EC office. EC insiders alleged that not only the Ministers had repeatedly thumped the table while speaking to the EC, they warned him that a larger procession would arrive in the area soon, unless the EC ordered that counting of votes would be held on schedule, on October 7 and the results declared officially. The EC’s crime was that in view of the worst, widespread, unprecedented violence, intimidation and poll rigging that would have put to shame the worst of excesses seen in Bihar or UP earlier, he had considered a repoll. He had little choice, having seen detailed coverage of unbridled hooliganism in most areas on the TV channels. No fewer that 21 working journalists were bashed up by rampaging TMC goons during 4-5 hours of ‘polling’ (rigging?) — and this, over a minor bout of civic polls! Even as Upadhyay, much to his credit held out, he had a phone call from a VIP that he could not ignore, while he was briefing the press. When he resumed his briefing, the shaken EC changed his stand by 180 degrees, saying there would be a repoll only at a few booths, no more. Most observers’ reports, he said, claimed a fair, peaceful poll. This against a backdrop of incidents on electronic media showing how old men and women had not been spared by bomb-throwing, lathi wielding youths who took over entire booths and prevented CCTVs from functioning. The police looked the other way. Long queues of genuine voters waited for hours, without relief, as armed’ outsiders ‘terrorised officials and stamped on ballots’. The following day, Upadhyay did not report for work and went to the Raj Bhavan in the afternoon to submit his resignation. Was the state government embarrassed? For the TMC, ”embarrassment’ and “apology” are not words to be found in the dictionary. After one or two officials had turned down the offer, the intrepid Transport Secretary Alapan Bandopadhyay, a former journalist, accepted the challenge, agreeing to become the acting EC, on the Chief Minister’s request. “The TMC has reduced the EC to the status of a routine government department,” opposition leaders said in unison. And well they might, for the new appointment had been made avoiding a Cabinet meeting, a standard procedure. The new man had not even resigned from his present post of Transport Ministry, but TMC sources said that of course he would. Apparently, their verbal assurance was enough. The new appointment has been challenged by political activists at the Kolkata High Court, where the judge asked some sharp questions of government counsel and the Advocate General. However, he did not issue any interim order to suspend the polling process. A ruling would be announced on November 23. The irony: Given the state of the divided opposition, the TMC would have won this round of elections hands down anyway, most observers were agreed. (IPA Service) 

By Ashok B Sharma


Defence of a country is vital, particularly when it is surrounded by countries claiming parts of its territory. The situation is aggravated when an immediate neighbour is engaged in a proxy war by facilitating infiltration of terrorists with the sole intention of carrying out its acts for destabilization in the destination country. India is faced with such a situation and the need to build up its defence is critical. The Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley while presenting his annual Budget has acknowledged this saying “defence of every inch of our motherland comes before anything else.” But has he done sufficient justice in allocation of funds for the country’s defence?


True, the Union Budget has raised its allocation for defence spending to Rs 2,46,727 crore, an increase of 7.74 per cent over previous year’s budgetary estimate. This allocation, however, does not include Rs 54,500 crore for pensions and Rs 8,852.6 crore towards civil expenditure. On the face value the figure of allocation may look astronomical, but comparing it in relative terms it is only 1.75 per cent of the GDP, marginally lower than 1.81 per cent of the GDP in the previous year. The defence expenditure in relation to the GDP is on a declining trend since last 30 years and the 14th Finance Commission, the recommendations of which has been accepted by the government in full, has raised serious concerns over this declining trend.


The GDP figure represents the growth in the economy and does reflect the resources available to the government, Therefore, defence allocation vis-à-vis the GDP may not be best indicator for judgement. Rather it would be more rational to compare defence allocation with the total government expenditure. The share of defence allocation in central government’s total expenditure has marginally increased from 12.8 per cent in the previous year to 13.9 per cent.


Now considering the year-on-year growth rate in defence allocation, the figures show that it has declined from 12.4 per cent in the previous year when an allocation of Rs 2,29,000 crore was made to 7.74 per cent in the current year.


The most important agenda before the government is modernization and indigenization in defence production. Hence capital expenditure in the defence budget assumes importance as it is used for acquisition and production of defence platforms and equipment. But unfortunately the share of capital expenditure in the defence budget is on a declining trend. Last year the share of capital expenditure was 41.3 per cent as compared the share of revenue expenditure at 58.7 per cent. This year the share of capital expenditure has fallen to 38.3 per cent while that of revenue expenditure has shot up to 61.7 per cent. This is the second time in the recent past that the share of capital expenditure in the defence budget has fallen to below 40 per cent. It last occurred in 2009-10 when the hike in pay and allowances was effected on recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission. Even the allocations for “stores”, which is key to maintenance, is only 17 per cent of the growth in defence budget.


It is noteworthy that in the current year’s defence budget that out of the hike of 7.74 per cent (Rs 17,727 crore), Rs 8,855 crore or 50 per cent is due to the increase in pay and allowances of the armed forces. Thus the total revenue expenditure has been hiked from Rs 1,34,412.05 crore in the previous year to Rs 1,52,139 crore while the capital expenditure has remained stagnant at Rs 94,588 crore.


The stagnation in allocation for capital expenditure is likely to place the programme for modernization under acute stress. Already there is a huge amount of committed liabilities on account of contracts already signed. Further there are new plans. The downward revision of capital acquisition budget in 2014-15 had already caused a difficult situation and its continued stagnation in 2015-16 has aggravated the problem. One can easily gauge the magnitude of the problem when mega deals are in pipeline for signing like tanker aircraft deal with Airbus, two helicopter contracts with Boeing and Rafale fighter deal with Dassault Aviation to name a few. The deal alone will eat into about half of the Air Force acquisition budget as its initial payment is estimated at Rs 15,000 crore.


The Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley should realise the situation and should take adequate steps to increase the acquisition budget in the course of the year. He should act if he really means what he has said “both transparency and quick decision making” in purchase of defence platforms and equipment with the intention of “thus keeping our defence forces ready for any eventuality.”


Despite the 14th Finance Commission expressing concerns over the declining trend in defence capital expenditure, it has said that estimating it is “beyond the scope of our assessment.” It now rests with the government to effect adequate increases in times of need. Jaitley has acknowledged in his Budget speech that interest, subsidies and defence expenditure together make up nearly 75 per cent of the non-Plan expenditure, but the reality is that the share of defence expenditure is gradually declining. Over the years the ratio between Plan and non-Plan expenditure has remained skewed.


There is an inherent problem in preparation of defence budget over the years. The projections of the Defence Ministry are usually scaled down in settling the final allocation. The gap between the resource needs projected by the Defence Ministry and what is finally settled is ever widening. Defence Ministry, therefore, need to do adequate homework in consultations with three services before preparing the demand for allocations under specific heads so as to convince the officials in the Finance Ministry. Hopefully the Defence Minister Manohar Prabhu Parrikar, who is new to the ministry, will address the problem in the near future.


Another problem which Parrikar needs to address is to be cautious is spending the allocations made and not to leave unspent balance, particularly regarding modernization and indigenization programmes. There are instances when funds from capital allocations were shifted to meet revenue expenditure. At the revised estimate stage, only in four out of last 20 years, the Defence Ministry got additional funds and only in one year did it fully utilize the allocated budgetary estimate. In the remaining 15 years, the ministry failed to fully utilize the funds meant for modernization.


Particularly in relation to capital acquisition budget there should be an elbow space for accommodating the fluctuations in foreign exchange rate. While committed liabilities are reckoned at the prevailing exchange rate when the contracts are signed, the actual expenditure is incurred at the foreign exchange rate prevalent at the time of making stage payment.


The problems before the Union government should also be kept in mind. It is facing resource crunch following the implementation of the recommendations of the14th Finance Commission whereby 62 per cent of the total tax receipts, including the divisible pool of taxes, grants and plan transfers, would be devolved to the States. Also the current scheme of transparent coal auctioning will accrue more benefits to coal-bearing States. Therefore Prime Minister Modi has adopted the route of inviting more of domestic private sector participation, encouraging the inflow of foreign direct investments (FDIs), co-designing, co-development and co-production under ‘Make in India’ campaign. The Budget has made a humble beginning in promoting ‘ease of doing business’ in the country, but it needs to be implemented at the ground level. (IPA Service)



Voted Thanks!
Loading Posts...