Cynics tried to halt reforms: Manmohan

The general opinion among political leaders, experts and others the UPA government took an unusually strange and adamant stand on allowing FDI in multi-brand retail trade. It refused to heed to unprecedented public sentiment and opposition from almost all political parties, baring the Congress Party, Nationalist Congress Party, Rashtriya Lok Dal and Rashtriya Janatha Dal, entire trading community, farmers’ bodies, experts and the public in general. Reports suggest that the UPA government became susceptible to powerful lobbying engaged by Walmart and other multinational retail giants to pressurise the Indian government to allow FDI in retail trade. It seems that through constant lobbying, they were able to persuade their home countries, especially the American government to exert pressure on the Indian government.  Further, it is also reported they had also influenced American based rating agencies to plant news warning possible downgrading of India to negative rating unless India embarked on second generation reforms, including FDI in retail trade.
  Now it has also come to light (as per the lobbying disclosure reports filed by Walmart with the US Senate) that Walmart has spent about $25 million (around Rs. 125 crore) since 2008 for its various lobbying activities, especially for allowing FDI in mutli-brand retail trade India.25 Moreover, it is suspected that in addition to the amount disclosed as expenditure towards lobbying, Walmart has reportedly spent huge amount as kick off payments to Indians. The revelation about spending huge amount by Walmart for lobbying to persuade the government of India to allow FDI in   retail trade in India  has caused utter consternation among a cross section of the people of the country. And bowing to opposition pressure, the government on 12.12.2012 announced a time-bound inquiry by a retired judge into reports of lobbying by retail giant Walmart to gain entry into India.  But many believe that announcement that a retired judge would hold inquiry will be of no use. They feel that the inquiry should be conducted by a Special Investigating Team (SIT) under supervision of the Supreme Court or at least by a sitting judge of the Supreme Court. So, for the judicial inquiry, terms of reference should be broad based, otherwise it will be very easy to skip off and get clean chit to this giant company. Where is the guarantee that Walmart will not indulge in high voltage lobbying to get clean chit?
       Walmart in fact was so sure of getting permission to carry on retail trading in India. While the other multinationals retail giants continue to wait for fuller access, Walmart has been making hectic ground work in various cities in India so as to make a grand entry once permission is given to open retail outlet. Moreover, it has expanding its joint venture with Bharti, an Indian conglomerate, which provides wholesaling and logistics—including to Bharti's Easy Day chain. The Public Interest Litigation filed in the Madras High Court by T. Vellaiyan, President, Federation of Tamil Nadu Traders' Association, has brought to light that Walmart has fraudulently entered into multi-brand retail trading even before the government notified FDI in mutli-brand retail trade.23 That is, in March and April 2012 year, -Wall-Mart Stores Inc, USA through its subsidiary, in collusion with two Indian firms, illegally invested Rs 455.80 crore in multi -brand retail in India by masquerading it as for “Services Sector.”
The only redeeming factor for the traders is that it is left to the States to decide whether or not to allow FDI in multi-brand retail trade. Yet it is feared that once they get a foothold in any part of the country, Nevertheless, according to leaders of political parties, a change of government in 2014 or even earlier might see scrapping of the decision to allow FDI in retail trade. The general temper of political opinion in the country on FDI in retail trade was sounded by AIADMK leader. V. Maitreyan in the Rajya Sabha on 06.12.2012 as follows: “If the UPA wins this vote, it will be the victory of the UPA’s maneuverability, not of the FDI policy which has been opposed by a majority of parties in the House…The people will reply in the 2014 polls and I give a solemn assurance that the next government that comes to power will reverse this decision of the UPA.”  Senior BJP leader Murli Manohar Joshi has said that foreign direct investment in retail would be scrapped if NDA is voted to power in 2014 general elections.26 Sharad Yadav, Convener of National Democratic Alliance (NDA) on said that if NDA is voted to power in general election of 2014, it will reject the current notification of allowing FDI in Retail Trade.27  On 11.12.2012, the  CPM  General Secretary Prakash Karat,  warned  that left parties would not allow even a single Walmart outlet to be set up in the country.          
In sum, today, the entire trading community is totally agitated and frenzied over the government’s notification allowing 51% FDI in multi-brand retail trade. Nevertheless, they feel confident that   eventually the decision to allow 51% FDI in multi-brand retail trade will be scraped.  Traders say that they are prepared to sacrifice to attain the goal of scrapping the notification on FDI in multi-brand retail trade. Traders also feel that it is the duty of every Indian to fight to liberate the country form falling into colonial control under the multinational corporations of America and the Western countries. According to them, the fight against FDI in retail is akin to second freedom struggle.  In short, the general consensus is that the decision to allow FDI in muti-brand retail trade needs to be scrapped. Time alone will tell, what is going to happen!

Deccan Herald, Dec.16, 2012.

Prime Minister is spreading false stories about benefits of FDI

The Prime Minister is spreading false stories about benefits accruing to the farmers in terms of better prices for their products owing to the introduction of FDI in multi-brand retail.The stated purpose of liberalising FDI in retail is that it will attract investments for modernising India’s supply-chain infrastructure, especially for the agricultural sector, in turn, providing better returns to farmers and small agro-processing units through enhanced direct sourcing as well as curbing inflation by reducing wastage. The argument is that the giant foreign retail chains will squeeze out the middlemen thereby providing higher prices to farmers and at the same time provide large investments for the development of post-harvest and cold chain infrastructure. Today, in the West, corporate retailers control the entire supply chain of food and farmers have no alternative but to sell to select corporate retail giants. This has led to monopoly conditions, where there is just one or few buyers, farmers have no choice but to sell their produce at the price offered by them. The general practice is that in order to maximise the gain, corporations will contract with farmers and push them for single crop cultivation, using genetically modified seeds with extensive use of pesticides and chemicals which will destroy the fertility of land. It is already happening in India and will only intensify as retailers seek to enter directly in the agriculture sector. All these claims of showering of benefits to farmers are fallacious and the big retails have not helped farmers anywhere in the world. Even in Latin American countries, including Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Colombia, where supermarkets, most of them owned by multinational giants, now control 65 to 95 per cent of sales, many farmers have been forced to quit agriculture.Evidences show that farmers in the West have paid a big price, with hundreds of thousands forced to abandon their farms, due to corporatisation of the farming sector, along with corporate control of the purchasing side among processors and retailers. Therefore, there is no point in giving this stake (i.e. multi-brand retail trading) to the foreign retailers, albeit to cater inflation. India might receive some foreign direct investments; but this will make the situation even worse by displacing the farmers leading to increase in rural unemployment and poverty. Given the already over-crowded agriculture sector, and the stagnating manufacturing sector, and the hard nature and relatively low wages of jobs in both, many million Indians are virtually forced into the services sector, particularly in retail trade.( Excerpts from the book authored by this commentator entitled, “FDI in Retail Trade in India: a Retrograde Step” by M/s RAC Publications, No. 38 (Old No. 76-A) Choolaimedu, Chennai-60094.''

The Times of India, Dec.10, 2012.

FDI vote in Parliament

It is true that the government has won the game of defeating the motion for withdrawal of FDI in retail trade moved by the leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha, Mrs. Sushma Swaraj. But it is not a matter of gratification or joy, but an indication of degradation morality and lack of clean politics, Together with the DMK President M.Karunanidhi, the BSP supremo Mrs. Mayawati and the SP supremo Mr. Mulayam Singh Yadav, the Congress party and the UPA government have enacted the most foul scenes of dinner diplomacy, inducement, cajoling and bullying, besides arm twisting and blackmailing of   the above regional political parties by using CBI. Politics in this country has fallen deep into  decay and lip service, double speak, blustering, time serving, ditching, switching sides, finding scapegoats have become the order of the day, which shows the  state of Indian Politics.  But it is gratifying to note that all the political parties except the Congress Party and headed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and Nationalist Congress Party headed by Mr.Sharath Pawar is opposed to the move to allow the multinational retail giants to set up retail shops in the country. Of course all these three leaders (the DMK President M.Karunanidhi, the BSP supremo Mrs. Mayawati and the SP supremo Mr. Mulayam Singh Yadav) are time servers and dishonest persons. Therefore, the people of the country never expected that they will stand firmly on their policy of opposing FDI in multi-brand retail trade.  But many believed that at least on this anti-people and anti-national issue, they may stick to their stand. Mr. Karunanidhi has always been saying that his party was totally against FDI in multi-brand retail trade. In fact executive council of the DMK party passed a resolution stating that it will not support the government on FDI in retail trade. And participating in the discussion on the motion against FDI in the Lok Sabha on 04.12.2012 the DMK MP, Mr. Ilangovan, stated that his party was totally against FDI in multi-brand retail trade because it would affect the livelihood of millions of traders. But in a manner characteristic of his party leader, he stated that DMK will not vote against the government. What an absurd stand? SP Chief Mulayam Singh Yadav stated categorically and emphatically that FDI in retail is not in favour of the country. He also said that the retail in FDI would not create jobs in the country and therefore his party was totally opposed to the move of the government to allow multinational retail giants to open shops in India. Yet he said his party will not go with all the arguments made by the opposition. What a comical stand? BSP leader Dara Singh Chauhan said: “Poor people are anxious over the impact this policy can have on their lives. They fear the multinational companies will take away their livelihoods. The government should not rush with it."  But BSP abstained from voting thereby paving the way for the victory of the government. What a ludicrous position? People should bend their head down for voting such parties into power.

In allowing FDI in retail trade, India is sold in the hands of US & Europeans, paving the way for economic colonialism. Empirical studies have shown that consumer prices in supermarkets in Latin America, Africa and Asia have remained higher than the open market by 20 to 30 per cent after the entry of Walmart and other multinational retail giants.  The Indian retail market is estimated to be around $400 billion with more than 12 million retailers employing 40 million people. Ironically, Wal-Mart’s turnover is also around $420 billion, but it employs only 2.1 million people all over the world.  Recently New York Times exposed showed how Wal-Mart had captured nearly 50 per cent of Mexico’s retail market in 10 years. As per the NYT disclosure “the Mexican subsidiary of Wal-Mart, which opened 431 stores in 2011, had paid bribes & an internal enquiry into the matter has been suppressed at corporate headquarters in Arkansas.” As per a disclosure statement made in the U.S Walmart alone has spent US$ 260 million in two years to lobby for FDI in retail trade in India.  Therefore, all right thinking Indians should fight for the scrapping of the decision to allow 51% FDI in retail trade. India is only country in the world which thinks that the foreigner is better for us than a local. For a country that has experienced colonial rule, this is bizarre. No doubt, FDI in retail trade will eventually lead to economic colonialism. Therefore, we have to fight to emancipate our country form falling into colonial control under the multinational corporations of America and the Western countries. Indeed our fight against FDI in retail is akin to second freedom    struggle. All of us should be prepared to sacrifice to attain the goal of scrapping the notification on FDI.

Now coming to realities, actually, Dr.Manmohan Singh and the so called votaries of FDI in mutli-brand retail trade   know very well that “FDI in retail trade will not serve any purpose. It will do more harm than benefit the people.” In fact, in 2002, as leader of the opposition in Rajya Sabha, Dr.Singh fought tooth and nail against the introduction of FDI in retail. His colleague Mr. Priya Ranjan Munshi castigating the BJP, which was in power then and who tried to bring FDI in retail, said “it is anti-national to bring FDI in retail.”  Now, Dr. Singh says that FDI in retail is pro- national and is to be welcomed, irrespective of merits or demerits. What is cause for the somersault by Dr.Singh and the Congress party? Is it not true that they have fallen prey to the powerful lobbying by Walmart and other multinational retail giants and the pressure exerted by their home governments? Does it not mean that erroneous factors and extraneous considerations have played foremost roles?

The government’s propaganda that FDI in multi-brand retail will bring benefit to farmers and consumers is   nothing but deceptive misinformation, which is not supported by facts. The argument that FDI in retail trade will lead to generation of employment opportunities is fallacious and not supported by historical evidences. On the contrary crores of people who earn their livelihood from the millions of existing retail outlets may be put out of business by the retail biggies. Most ridiculous contention of the government is that it be possible to bring down inflation by allowing FDI in retail trade.  There is scarcely any evidence to show that foreign investment, especially FDI, has acted as an enabling factor for controlling inflationary pressure anywhere in the world. On the contrary, there are ample proofs of foreign investment causing inflationary spiraling of prices in the host countries. The government has not explained how and in   what manner FDI in retail trade will lead to fall in prices; and how long the fall in prices, if any, will be sustained. Is there any guarantee that prices will be stabilised and thereby the real income of the people will increase on a long-term basis? Moreover, many recent research studies have shown that FDI in retail trade will be disastrous for the country. A most recent study by this commentator, the results which have been published in the form of a book entitled, “FDI in Retail Trade in India: a Retrograde Step” by M/s RAC Publications, No. 38 (Old No. 76-A) Choolaimedu, Chennai-60094, concludes as follows: “  Evidences from various parts of the world indicate that   widespread   emergence of big format retail super stores have lead to extensive  ruin of  retail stores/shops thereby resulting in the loss  of employment and livelihood to millions of persons involved in retail trade. Research findings have exposed that large scale unemployment has proved to be social dynamite. That is, increase in unemployment leads to a series of social problems, like rise in poverty, alcoholism, domestic violence, indebtedness, suicides and crime in general, leading to a chaotic situation in the society. In sum, the inescapable conclusion is that any disruption of the prevailing system of retail trading will affect all sections of Indian society.  FDI in retail trade will not serve any purpose. It will do more harm than benefit the people, especially to the unorganised/informal retail sector, which is a vital source of occupation and livelihood for the multitude unemployed people of the country, besides being the cushion for those who are displaced from their occupations/employment for various reasons.”

Thus, the vote on the motion to withdraw FDI in muti-brand retail trade has proved beyond doubt that the country is passing through a serious moral crisis. The dishonest and corrupt politicians will stoop to   any level to safeguard themselves. They do lip service that they are for the welfare of the people. Who will save our country from further decay? How are we going to achieve clean and honest politics? Time alone will tell!  My only request is that let these so called champions of the downtrodden people ponder over for a while before deciding to vote for or against the motion to   withdraw FDI in retail trade in the Rajya Sabha.

Dr.C.Murukadas, Hindustan Times, Dec.6, 2012

Cauvery water dispute

The sharing of waters of the river Cauvery has been the source of a serious conflict between the Indian states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu for quite some time. But recently it has assumed dangerous proportions. It is a well established and internationally accepted norm that in the case of international/ interstate rivers the lower riparian nations/states have primacy over the right share the water. Many water sharing agreements have been reached among many countries and by and large they are rarely breached. India has water sharing agreements with Pakistan as well as Bangladesh. Although India’s overall relationship with Pakistan is acrimonious and contentious the agreement between the two countries in sharing Indus' water is relatively secure. Similarly after  a comprehensive bilateral treaty was signed by the then-Indian Prime Minister H. D. Deve Gowda and the then-Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed on December 12, 1996,the sharing of the Ganges' waters is no more an acrimonious issue. This is because of clear laid down rules of Law on water sharing. Because India is a federal democracy, and because rivers cross state boundaries, constructing efficient and equitable mechanisms for allocating river flows has long been an important legal and constitutional issue. Numerous inter-state river-water disputes have erupted since independence. A recent dispute over use of the Yamuna River among the states of Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, was resolved by conferences involving three state Chief Ministers, as well as the central government after intervention by the Supreme Court had failed. However inter-state water disputes continue to fester. Of all such disputes, the Cauvery River dispute between Tamilnadu and Karnataka rages on without a resolution in sight. The two sister states fighting, where everything is common, is a shame on the politicians on both sides. Historical natural flow at Cauvery dwindled due to intervention in the upstream by Karnataka, i.e. by unilaterally constructing numerous dams and barrages. Tamilnadu being a lower riparian state has been subjected to bullying on the Cauvery water and over the years the quantum of water released by Karnataka to Tamilnadu has progressively been diminished, which is totally against the water sharing agreement between the two states. It has become a characteristic feature that only the surplus water is being  released to Tamilnadu.

Once Cauvery was a perennial flowing river and water flowed upto the tail end almost throughout the year. As a result agriculture was developed in the delta area of Cauvery over centuries. And the Cauvery delta was one of the most prosperous regions of India as well as the whole world. The numerous big temples found all over the Cauvery delta region is the standing indicator of the prosperity of the region. But in the past, when agriculture was widely practiced in the delta region, the area now covered under the upper riparian region in the present Karnataka state agriculture was not developed and the people of the region continued to practice tribal farming methods. But in the course of the twentieth century the people of the upper riparian region now in Karnataka also slowly learned to undertake modern farm in and started drawing more water form the river Cauvery for agriculture. Moreover due rapid growth of population more and more area of land has been brought under cultivation in the recent decades, particularly after independence, and stated drawing more and more water. Similarly, large quantity of water has been drawn for drinking water needs. But the Karnataka state never took any steps to make efficient use of water. Because of expanded agriculture and increase in supply of drinking water, Karnataka state started  drawing excessively large proportion of Cauvery water. It constructed so many dams and barracks across Cauvery due to which the Tamilnadu’s legitimate share of Cauvery water was denied. The saddening aspect is that the Karnataka state constructed new dams without the consent of the lower riparian states and clearance from the central government. Now the situation has become very dangerous and paddy crops over 12 lakh acres are withering. The pity is that the Kuruvai crop raised by the delta farmers also had failed due to water scarcity.  Now the Samba crop is also under threat of failure. The Cauvery delta farmers in Tamil Nadu are deprived of their source of livelihood due to crop failure.

While the Tamilnadu government is taking all possible steps to save the Samba crops, the Karnataka state is adamant in refusing to release the legitimate share of the former. Moreover, the Central government is keeping stony silence on the issue of Cauvery water dispute. The attitude and actions of the central government are unconstitutional and favouring Karnataka state. It is the constitutional duty of the Prime Minister of India and the Cabinet headed by him to intervene strongly at times of natural calamity such as drought, flood and epidemics. Moreover, when crisis occurs in a states due to rioting and other forms of public disorder the Central government has to intervene and provide necessary assistance to the states. Similarly, when other crises like fiscal problems arise due to unforeseen contingencies arising out of natural calamities, riots and so on, the centre has to rise to the occasion and impartially render assistance to the states. Although the Prime Minister of the country is elected on party lines, he has to rise above politics and treat all the states equally irrespective of which party is in power in a state. It is the basic tenets of the functioning of a Prime Minister and the government in a federal democracy like India. Now the question is whether our Prime Minster and the central government are free from partisan attitudes and treating all the states equally and impartially? The answer is big no, particularly in regard to Tamilnadu. Tamilnadu is now reeling under severe power cut due the wrong policies and priorities of the previous DMK regime, which is now the major partner of the UPA II government headed by Dr.Manmohan Singh. He has not taken efforts to provide relief to the power starved state of Tamilnadu. Now, coming to realities regarding Cauvery water dispute, the Prime Minister never cared to take any tangible step to solve it. While he is taking undue efforts to canvass support of various political parties for FDI in retail trade through dinner diplomacy and stooping to the level of offering various concessions to leaders of certain political parties in order to garner support, he has not found time to call the Chief Ministers of Tamilnadu and Karnataka and tried to find an amicable solution. Moreover, he has not properly attended to the request of the Tamilnadu Chief Minister through numerous letters for center's help. Tamilnadu has again and again been forced to approach the Supreme Court for some remedy. And only after the direction from the Supreme Court, he convened a meeting of Cauvery   River Authority, in which he is the Chairman, and directed Karnataka to release some water for Tamilnadu. But why has not he taken any steps to implement his order? Is he not partial and favouring Karnataka? Has he not shirked his responsibility as the head of the country and supreme authority? What is more, the final order issued by the Cauvery River Water Disputes Tribunal in 2007 about the sharing of water is yet to be gazetted by the central government, apparently because that could raise the hackles of Karnataka. It is time for the Prime Minister and the UPA government to apply reason and intervene strongly to resolve the issue amicably and thereby save the farmers of Cauvery delta.

Chidambaram pleads Indian human resources to return

   

The call by the Union Finance Minister,  P Chidambaram, to the youth who migrate to USA or elsewhere in the world to return after spending few years in other parts of the world to meet challenges of their own country is ill-conceived. India has the largest reservoir of economically active age group population in the world.  But due to unemployment a large proportion of this age group is not economically active. According to a recent report (October 2010) by Labour Bureau, in the 28 States/UTs surveyed, the total  population is estimated at 1182 million with 63.5 per cent population (751 million) in the working age group of 15-59 years. The worker population ratio is 325 persons per 1000 population at the overall level and 465 in the working age population (i.e. 15-59 age groups). Thus, out of the  total  estimated population of 1182 million, 384 million constituted the working population ( employed persons). The unemployment rate in 2009-10 is estimated at 9.4 per cent at the overall level as per the usual principal status. In the rural sector, the unemployment rate is around 10 per cent, while in the urban areas the unemployment rate is about 8 percent persons out of 1000 persons in the labour force. Moreover, according to National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), over half the country's workforce is self-employed and women receive less pay than men for similar jobs. While 51% of the country's total workforce is self-employed, only 15.5% are regular wagers or salaried employees and 33.5% casual labourers. The number of people self-employed is higher in rural areas at about 54.2%, against 41.4% in urban areas. Moreover, according to National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), over half the country's workforce is self-employed and women receive less pay than men for similar jobs. While 51% of the country's total workforce is self-employed, only 15.5% are regular wagers or salaried employees and 33.5% casual labourers. Moreover, many of those in the economically active age group lack skills. So skill development is the need of the hour. All out efforts should be made to impart skill to the youngsters. .At the same time, India is not able to provide suitable employment to all the qualified and skilled persons. Therefore, many of them migrate to USA and other countries in search of better pastures. Some of them stay back in the host countries. When there is no dearth of manpower,  asking them to return and end up in odd jobs is meaningless.

   Dr. C.Murukadas, The Times of India, Dec.2, 2012.

Left urges people to attend Delhi rally against FDI

All right thinking Indians should fight for the scrapping of the decision to allow 51% FDI in retail trade. The Communist parties have been consistently opposing is the governments decision to open the retail sector to multinational retail giants like Walmart. All of us will have to cooperate with the Communist parties in the struggle against FDI in retail trade irrespective of party affiliations. India is only country in the world which thinks that the foreigner is better for us than a local. For a country that has experienced colonial rule, this is bizarre. No doubt, FDI in retail trade will eventually lead to economic colonialism. Therefore, we have to fight to emancipate our country form falling into colonial control under the multinational corporations of America and the Western countries. Indeed our fight against FDI in retail is akin to second freedom struggle. All of us should be prepared to sacrifice to attain the goal of scrapping the notification on FDI. The government’s propaganda that FDI in multi-brand retail will bring benefit to farmers and consumers is   nothing but deceptive misinformation, which is not supported by facts. The argument that FDI in retail trade will lead to generation of employment opportunities is fallacious and not supported by historical evidences. On the contrary crores of people who earn their livelihood from the millions of existing retail outlets may be put out of business by the retail biggies. Most ridiculous contention of the government is that it be possible to bring down inflation by allowing FDI in retail trade.  There is scarcely any evidence to show that foreign investment, especially FDI, has acted as an enabling factor for controlling inflationary pressure anywhere in the world. On the contrary, there are ample proofs of foreign investment causing inflationary spiraling of prices in the host countries. The government has not explained how and in   what manner FDI in retail trade will lead to fall in prices; and how long the fall in prices, if any, will be sustained. Is there any guarantee that prices will be stabilised and thereby the real income of the people will increase on a long-term basis? Moreover, many recent research studies have shown that FDI in retail trade will be disastrous for the country. A most recent study by this commentator, the results which have been published in the form of a book entitled, “FDI in Retail Trade in India: a Retrograde Step” by M/s RAC Publications, No. 38 (Old No. 76-A) Choolaimedu, Chennai-60094, concludes as follows: “Evidences from various parts of the world indicate that   widespread   emergence of big format retail super stores have lead to extensive ruin of retail stores/shops thereby resulting in the loss of employment and livelihood to millions of persons involved in retail trade.…The inescapable conclusion is that any disruption of the prevailing system of retail trading will affect all sections of Indian society.  FDI in retail trade will not serve any purpose. It will do more harm than benefit the people”

Dr. C.Murukadas, The Times of India, Dec.2, 2012.