The Panthic controversy
NOTHING can be more painful to an overwhelming section of the Sikh community than the differences that have surfaced among the Jathedars of Akal Takht, Sri Kesgarh Sahib and Sri Damdama Sahib.

Austerity on paper
THE government’s “strict instructions” to all ministries, departments and heads of public sector enterprises to reduce the number of employees on their rolls and also to cut expenditure would have not evoked such a big yawn if this were the first time that such a directive was being issued.

The success of RIBs
by Balraj Mehta
MR YASHWANT SINHA, the Union Finance Minister has gone to town with the “outstanding” success of Resurgent India Bonds which has fetched for him to play with over 4 billion dollars from non-resident Indians.


Time for SAARC Parliament
by Rakshat Puri
THE recent meeting at Colombo of the heads of government of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation has indicated, among other things, that political approach and attitude cannot much longer be kept out of SAARC’s deliberations.

. Permit raj under new garb by Tavleen Singh SO, its business as usual in Delhi’s economic ministries despite our shiny, new BJP Government. We were going to get ‘transparency’ in government functioning, we were told by Atal Behari Vajpayee, but if you see what happened to the Tata group’s attempts to start an airline you know that nothing has changed. Made in India for Indians by Amita Malik EVER since I can remember (my father bought his first radio set second-hand from the Governor of Assam in Shillong so he could listen to the BBC) the BBC has projected British culture with its many-faceted international programmes and coverage in different languages for different regions. A mother’s name by Deepa Rakesh Singh THE joys of parenthood are wide-ranging and manifold and hardly need to be written about, least of all in a country like ours where almost everyone manages to confer this honour upon themselves.

75 Years Ago

Amritsar disturbances
THE Anjuman-i-Islamia, Amritsar, has issued a long detailed statement concerning the causes of the recent disturbances in Amritsar and has tried to throw the entire blame for the unhappy outbreaks of April and May last on the Hindu community.

The Panthic controversy

NOTHING can be more painful to an overwhelming section of the Sikh community than the differences that have surfaced among the Jathedars of Akal Takht, Sri Kesgarh Sahib and Sri Damdama Sahib. These differences may not be substantial or fundamental in nature but they have upset a large number of people who like the Panthic unity to remain undisturbed. The current controversy revolves round the funds raised for the much-publicised World Sikh Council formed at the behest of the SGPC and Akal Takht. The Jathedar of Akal Takht, Bhai Ranjit Singh, has accused the Jathedar of Sri Kesgarh Sahib, Bhai Manjit Singh, of misappropriating funds collected for the World Sikh Council. He has also accused him and the Jathedar of Sri Damdama Sahib, Giani Kewal Singh, of indulging in a malicious campaign against him with a view to dislodging him from the present position. The whole episode has taken a bitter turn amidst mutual mud-slinging which is unparalleled in Sikh history. Bhai Ranjit Singh has also barred the two head priests from attending any meeting of Akal Takht. As it is, the World Sikh Council itself is caught in a dispute. This matter is before court.

Akal Takht has its own maryada. It is not a forum for settling personal scores. There is sanctity about it and those occupying high positions are expected to guide the community in the true tradition of the Gurus. There are certain established norms and guidelines which the custodians of the Sikh Panth are expected to observe both in letter and in spirit. All differences among them are expected to be sorted out quietly and according to the highest tradition of Sikhism. The question here is not of scoring personal points but of setting examples which should inspire confidence among the masses.

We expect the SGPC to play an enlightened role at this critical moment. In fact, instead of allowing things to drift, it should have intervened promptly and decisively so that the infighting among the Jathedars did not hurt the feelings of the Sikh masses. For them, religion is not only a matter of faith but also a way of life. They look up to the highest seat of Sikhism to keep their faith and hopes alive. Therein lies the sanctity of the hukamnamas. Being the dispensation of the great Gurus, they form a unique constituent of the Sikh heritage and naturally evoke the deepest sentiments of veneration among them. It is a pity that a recent hukamnama on the langar issue has created problems among the Sikhs in Canada and elsewhere. It may be recalled that Bhai Ranjit Singh had directed the Sikh community not to take langar on dining tables but confine themselves to the practice of squatting on the floor as per the tradition followed so far. This directive is being opposed by a section of the Canadian Sikhs. They hold that the langar being served in a sangat while sitting on a chair was approved some 70 years ago. They also point out that if the present Jathedar wanted to change this, he should have called a Sarbat Khalsa and then got it endorsed by the heads of the five Takhts.

Certain signs of division within the community, howsoever limited these might be, are disquieting. We expect the SGPC President, Mr Gurcharan Singh Tohra, to take urgent steps to defuse the crisis facing the Panth. Sikhism is a great religion. It is both enlightened and liberal in its tradition. It also has an inbuilt mechanism to evolve itself in tune with the changing times without diluting or compromising the basic principles, traditions and values set by the Gurus. Of course, steering the Panth's ship to the shore is not an easy task. It has been "a challenging responsibility" at the best of times. Mr Tohra should see to it that controversies do not spoil the serene atmosphere when the Sikh community is enthusiastically preparing for the tercentenary celebrations of the Khalsa Panth. After all, doing right is as vital as thinking right. Says Guru Nanak Devji: "Truth is higher than everything else, but higher by far is the living of truth."

Austerity on paper

THE government’s “strict instructions” to all ministries, departments and heads of public sector enterprises to reduce the number of employees on their rolls and also to cut expenditure would have not evoked such a big yawn if this were the first time that such a directive was being issued. But the homily has become a ritual and has stopped carrying conviction. All these brave words prove to be cries in the wilderness, to be repeated ad nauseam by other leaders a few months or years later. Either trade unions or opposition parties again raise a hue and cry and the entire austerity measure comes to a dead halt. At times, expenditure balloons instead of coming down. That is what happened in the time of Finance Minister P. Chidambaram who announced a similar Rs 3,000-crore austerity measure two years ago. Central trade organisations raised a stink and that put paid to his intentions. It has now been resurrected, but one can be quite certain of the course that it will run. The problem is that in most cases such instructions are only meant for public consumption. As far as the “consumption” by the persons who should effect economy is concerned, it goes on as usual. That is what had happened in 1992 under Mr P.V.Narasimha Rao. He too wanted various departments to reduce the number of employees on their rolls and also bring about a reduction in unproductive expenditure. Nothing happened.

The main reason for this malady is that sincerity for effecting change and implementing unpopular decisions is lacking. Any Prime Minister or the Chief Minister who intends to galvanise the various departments into action should first downsize his own ministry. The recommendation that the size of the ministry should not exceed 10 per cent of the strength of the House is breached almost everywhere. Even where there is sincerity to cut down the expenditure, the political will is lacking. Government servants comprise an extremely vocal and powerful lobby and have perfected the technique of stalling any undesirable move. The fate of the Fifth Pay Commission recommendations is before us. Those regarding salary hikes were lapped up. But neither the number of holidays has been reduced nor redundant posts abolished. Interestingly, all measures that are suggested to discipline the workforce are branded “anti-employee”. None of the recent governments has shown either moral or political courage to take some tough decisions. In the time of coalition politics, no party wants to annoy any section of voters. With such a backdrop, it will require an exceptionally optimistic person to hope that the latest order will bring about any real change on the ground. While previous austerity measures had sought to abolish some senior posts, the latest edition starts at the bottom. All posts falling vacant at the lowest level in all the ministries and government departments will be abolished, “as far as possible”. The possibility of dharnas and agitations is built in. “As far as possible” can be narrowed down to almost zero figure by interested parties. That is a cynical evaluation of the scheme but if the past is any guide, that is the most likely outcome. It will be a sad day if this worst-case scenario comes true because the need for effecting economy is unexceptionable. The total expenditure on pay and allowances of Central Government staff has risen from Rs 10,000 crore to a staggering Rs 24,000 crore within just five years. That makes a mockery of the revolution in information technology, better communication systems and high-tech facilities, which send only one signal: cut the government to size.

THE SUCCESS OF RIBs
Ephemeral bonanza with risks galore
by Balraj Mehta

MR YASHWANT SINHA, the Union Finance Minister has gone to town with the “outstanding” success of Resurgent India Bonds (RIBs) which has fetched for him to play with over 4 billion dollars from non-resident Indians. This is a repeat performance and like Mr P. Chidambaram, his predecessor in the Finance Ministry who briefly wallowed in the collection of Rs 10 thousand crore by his scheme for disclosure by resident Indians of their black money last year, RIB is bound to be bonanza ephemeral.

The special incentives offered for success in both cases to raise financial resources for investment to lift the Indian economy out of depression have involved costs which will not enhance but would further weaken the self-sustaining impulses for socially oriented economic growth. The claim in particular that the funds so raised can be deployed to strengthen material and social infrastructure of the Indian economy is pointless and without substance.

The patriotic fervour and social responsibility of the contributors to these funds is plain hyperbole. They have responded only to realise mundane gains. In the case of the VDIS, the tax rate was scaled down to lower than 15 per cent of their liability and whetted the appetite of black operators for high returns on their black money hoards in future. RIBs have provided an opportunity to NRIs for lending at interest rates as high as 15 per cent compared to the much lower rate of less than 7 per cent available to them in their adopted countries. The risk factor for them in both schemes has been minimal, indeed non-existent for them. If black money operators enjoyed immunity against any penalty, the NRIs are protected against depreciation in the exchange value of the Indian currency, which alone is estimated to cost the Indian exchequer as much as $600 million in the five years of RIB maturity.

If the VDIS failed to bring down the fiscal deficit of the government and provide additional funds for productive investment, the RIBs are not likely to strengthen the external payments portion of India or stabilise the exchange value of the Indian rupee. The idea of mobilising financial resources by such costly fiscal and monetary investments is indeed misconceived and counterproductive.

The fact really is that the fiscal balance of the government has become more and more stretched in the nineties because of the failure to raise resources at an affordable cost. The official policy, under pressure from the vested interests, domestic and foreign and guided by foreign advice has tended in the nineties quickly to shed its developmental role. Public investment has, therefore, gone down for ideological reasons as well as due to resource constraints. Private investment, Indian and foreign, has not made good the deficiency in public investment. Hence, the crumbling material infrastructure — energy, communication and transport systems — as well as decay of the social infrastructure — education, health and housing — especially for the mass of the people in India.

It is easy to notice even by a cursory examination that additional resource mobilisation of rupee in the case of the VDIS and foreign exchange by RIBs, has not been so much additive as substitutive of the normal flows to the Indian exchequer. The VDIS collection coincided with a large shortfall in the collection of revenue from taxation. Inflows of foreign exchange by way of RIBs do not make good the fall in direct as well as portfolio investment after the nuclear tests by India. Mr Sinha’s claim that RIBs have beaten the sanctions and the low credit rating of India after the nuclear blasts is an exaggeration. It is not fortuitous either that 50% of RIBs have been bought by NRIs from outside the developed countries.

The external payments position of India and its external debt is becoming more unmanageable than in 1991 when the programme for the structural adjustment for the privatisation and globalisation of the Indian economy was launched supposedly to overcome this critical vulnerability and speed up economic growth. India is now more dependent on external borrowing and external investment to prevent the economy from going deeper into the mire of stagflation, let alone create conditions for economic growth and social security. The political-strategic implications for this state of affairs too are becoming more and more grave and visible. For the Prime Minister himself to rush, on the eve of the NAM summit, to applaud the bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan by the USA allegedly to liquidate extremist hideouts is indeed ominous.

There have also been moves recklessly to try and raise even short-term foreign debt which exposes any country’s economy to foreign subversion. This has been graphically shown by the precipitate currency and investment crisis in East Asia. India, with the added disadvantage of having an economy in recession, is more vulnerable to a grave contingency arising from the servicing of its short-term foreign debt. It too is facing a near halt in direct foreign investment, withdrawal of portfolio investment, erosion of the value of its currency, and pressure on its foreign exchange reserves. Even the committed foreign direct investment wants sovereign guarantees for protection and quick and unhindered repatriation of profits from such investment. The government has found it necessary to hurriedly guarantee the pending investment proposals in thermal power generation and induce them to become operational.

This together with the equally hurried removal of the foreign debt ceiling of 40 per cent in the financing scheme for setting up foreign power plants and other long-gestating projects and duty-free imports of plant and equipment for them at dictated rather than at competitive prices, relaxation of end-use norms for foreign loans of Indian corporations and clearance of direct foreign investment not only to set up new projects but also for acquiring controlling shares in joint ventures is leading to the pileup of foreign debt to a dangerous level. Foreign debt per se may not be an evil if it is prudently managed and productively used. But when servicing of the debt, especially short and medium term foreign debt, amortisation and interest charges exceed payment capability, the balance of payments position of the country is bound to get out of gear. This is also resulting in the deterioration in the terms of international trade for India. The position in this respect has already reached such a pass where even a sharp upward trend in exports, which is not in sight, will not enable India to import at competitive prices. More and more export volumes have, therefore, to be made to import the same and even less and less volume of imports. This is the basic reason for the depreciation in the value of the rupee on a continuing basis in the nineties.

The increasing reliance on foreign investment, the much applauded no-risk, interest free inflow of capital from abroad, to achieve growth objectives, side-by-side, is strengthening the control of MNCs on established productive capacities in India which cater to the domestic, and not the global market. This results in further swelling of the net outflow of foreign exchange from the country. There has also been a large volume of foreign direct and portfolio investment, which has taken advantage of the depreciating rupee to acquire assets and markets of domestic companies at extremely lower doll prices. FDI, when it is directed to infrastructure areas like telecommunications and power, oil exploration and refining, by its very nature involves a net outflow of foreign exchange for import of plant and equipment associated with it and that too duty free. The Reserve Bank of India reports show that investment in consumer durables like “domestic appliances” and in the services sector is resulting in zero export earnings. The adverse implications of the kind of FDI that has been attracted by India, are glaring for its balance of payments position.

To overcome the foreign dependency syndrome requires far more arduous, sustained and integrated effort than the launching of schemes to somehow raise foreign financial resources. The need is to break the stranglehold of foreign interests on official policy making. The need is for effective and innovative policies to mobilise the domestic resources, material, human and financial, and their optimal utilisation even as foreign resources may be attracted on fair terms to supplement the domestic effort. To make vociferous claims such as those made by Mr Yashwant Sinha regarding the RIBs beating the sanctions, economic and political, against India and a guarantee of the sound fundamentals of the Indian economy is to be irresponsible and foolish.

Time for SAARC Parliament
by Rakshat Puri

THE recent meeting at Colombo of the heads of government of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation has indicated, among other things, that political approach and attitude cannot much longer be kept out of SAARC’s deliberations. Very soon, it may become necessary to amend the Association’s Charter to this effect. A review of the Charter is in any case overdue for bringing it in line with the obtaining realities. In the circumstances, it may be more rewarding, and should accord with democratic evolution, for the SAARC governments seriously and urgently to consider the establishment of a SAARC Parliament.

Resting on the SAARC Charter’s Article 10, which requires that all decisions be taken unanimously and that bilateral and contentious issues be excluded from the Association’s deliberations, India emerged a winner from the Colombo meeting. Despite Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s persistent endeavour to bring his country’s political differences with India into the agenda for discussion, he was unable to persuade the majority. The reason was, partly, the limitations written into Article 10 of the Charter. Partly, it was because the agenda for the summit meeting was essentially economic.

Mr Sharif had proposed that since bilateralism in discussions on the Kashmir issue had not led to any solution or settlement, SAARC should consider establishing a “high Council” comprising the foreign ministers of the Association’s member-states for “inquiry, mediation and conciliation”. He had also suggested that SAARC discuss the South Asian “peace and security” situation following the Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests, a discussion that would also have embraced the Kashmir issue. The other heads of government did not accept Mr Sharif’s proposal. The Chairperson, Mrs Chandrika Kumaratunga, officially disapproved. The proposal fell through.

India’s Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee did go out of his way to be conciliatory. Among other things he announced the unilateral lifting of import restrictions from the SAARC countries of a large number of items. This would not only give a boost to trade prospects of the Association’s member countries, the announcement also signalled the message that prime importance would be given to raising the economic prosperity of the region and that achievement of a South Asian free trade area was a priority. All the SAARC members went along with this and were with Mrs Kumaratunga in officially disapproving the Pakistan Prime Minister’s proposal.

But the unofficially expressed reaction of most ministers and officials from the other countries present at the Colombo meeting is reported to have been, at the least, one of doubt about being able for long to keep bilateral political issues out of official reckoning at SAARC deliberations. Mrs Kumaratunga was herself reported as indicating that some measure of official cognizance would eventually have to be taken of political issues that simmered every time on the periphery of the Association’s formal agenda. In other words, the Charter may have to be reviewed and in due course amended for the SAARC governments to come to grips with prevailing reality in the region.

In this situation, SAARC might be wise and practical to take a leaf out of the European Union’s experience. The example of the establishment and growth of the European Parliament seems relevant for the SAARC countries. They might consider seriously the benefits that would result from establishment of a South Asian Parliament, elected directly, as is the European Parliament — election candidates being politically unrestricted and uninhibited by any kind of official restraint in the member-states. The discussions in the SAARC Parliament would consequently be unhampered and spontaneous. They would be a barometer of public opinion in the SAARC region. It seems obvious that a number of issues on which governments are agreed or not agreed may elicit a different kind of response from public opinion as expressed by the directly elected members of a South Asian Parliament.

While inspired by the establishment and development of the European Parliament, a South Asian Parliament would of course have to integrate with South Asian mores and circumstances. For example, considering that India is huge in area as well as population in comparison with the other member-states of SAARC, any population-representation ratio would be absurd. A South Asian Parliament might therefore have equal number of representatives from each of the seven member countries, the difference being in the size of the constituencies instead of in the number of representatives from each. Members of a South Asian Parliament — details of the structure and working of which would of course be discussed and determined by a constitutionally appointed SAARC body — would not represent governments. They would represent the public in the South Asian countries.

A mother’s name

by Deepa Rakesh Singh

THE joys of parenthood are wide-ranging and manifold and hardly need to be written about, least of all in a country like ours where almost everyone manages to confer this honour upon themselves. As they say — “there is only one miracle: that is life.” And in India this miraculous feat has been literally reduced to being a child’s play!

Between the parents, who contributes more to the development of a child has been debated for long and perhaps needlessly so. Because the fact remains that both play an equally important role. However, what also appears to be a fact is that it is the father and the father alone who seems to matter — on paper at least. Even in this day and age of single parenthood you go to fill up a form of any description — whether for a birth certificate, a driving licence, passport, ration card, library membership, admission to a school, college, university — and try getting away without having to fill in your father’s name! Married women are, however, very thoughtfully offered a sop in the form of an option between having to enter either their father’s name or husband’s. Thank God for small mercies!

With all due respect to fathers, one is not for a minute wishing them away. My only contention as a mother is that why is mother’s name not required to be mentioned as well? Surely, merely adding an extra column is not going to use up so much more paper as to cause an ecological imbalance and thus waste the natural resources of our Mother Earth. And if the sole purpose behind having to write in your father’s name everywhere is to establish your identity then it may be worthwhile to remember that while maternity is a fact, paternity is a matter of faith.

It is amazing how fathers who may have slept blissfully night after night while the newborn was crying his heart out, or not remembered for most part of their children’s lives their age, class or favourite food, or may have been the first ones to get into an argument with a teenaged son, are the blessed ones to have their names printed out for posterity on all birth certificates, marksheets and job applications. What happens to the mother? Perhaps the only time her name has any relevance is in the labour room when her name is written on a sterilized slip of paper and tied around her infant’s little wrist. And the day she is discharged from the hospital her name starts fading along with memories of feeding bottles and wet and dry nappies — as the case may be.

Some may feel that one is going on endlessly about an issue that does not really matter. But then can anyone explain why when my child fills up a form or a personal memoranda he is required to write in his name and of course his father’s name, age, sex, height, weight, blood group, chest measurements, details of eye-sight, dentist’s name, family doctor’s name, driving licence number, insurance number, credit card number etc. etc., in short everything except his mother’s name? Allow me, readers, to at least feel left out if nothing more.

A few weeks ago this very newspaper carried an article on “Thank Your Mother for Your Intelligence”. I read it with growing excitement, at last feeling vindicated in one area at least. Here was the breakthrough in medical research that I had been waiting for! I quickly took the paper to show to my boys as they were getting dressed for school. To humour me they went through the piece, but pat came the male chauvinistic reply. “Now we know who to thank for our report-cards.” So there I was: back to square one!

Having said all that I have, I must add that the good and the bad invariably come as a package deal. It was heartening to hear what happened to some friends who travelled to a dry state and were required to fill up the inevitable form to enable them to carry some alcohol with them. The form started with the column “Sharabi ka naam” followed by “Sharabi ke baap ka naam”! Our friends decided to remain dry rather than fill in the required information!

It would be unfair on my part not to mention here by children’s school where on the admission form both the father and the mother have to fill in their personal details. Three cheers for all such thoughtful institutions!

I know no one gives a damn and it does not make one bit of a difference to know anyone, but just in case anybody is interested in knowing — my mother’s name is Amita and she is a housewife.

Permit raj under new garb

by Tavleen Singh

SO, its business as usual in Delhi’s economic ministries despite our shiny, new BJP Government. We were going to get ‘transparency’ in government functioning, we were told by Atal Behari Vajpayee, but if you see what happened to the Tata group’s attempts to start an airline you know that nothing has changed. Business as usual means that the old licence-quota-permit raj continues to thrive but under a new garb. Licences have technically been done away with, since our economic reforms began in 1991, but ministries continue to decide who will benefit from liberalisation and to what extent. In other words, unwritten quotas and permits are still very much part of the functioning of our economic ministries. It is through these controls that the economic ministries ensure that even the best projects only get passed if you can grease the right palms, and lobby the right lobbies, in Delhi’s corridors of power.

If proof were needed of this it came in the Tata group’s decision last week not to try and start its airline. An important Tata functionary said: “It has taken us four years of effort, since February, 1995, when the open skies policy was first announced, to realise that the Ministry of Civil Aviation will never give a green light to the project.” The comment was made on the condition of anonymity, but when I asked him if he would confirm, even off the record, whether it was hefty lobbying on the part of another private airline and some greasing of high-level palms that had prevented their proposal going through he said wearily: “Why are you making me say this, why don’t you find out for yourself”.

In fact, I have paid close attention to the workings of the Civil Aviation Ministry ever since the open skies policy was announced. My interest came not just from the fact that I believe firmly that we will never have decent airlines in India as long as they are run by the government but also because I have personally known most of the ministers who have come and gone.

It is through this acquaintance that I have seen how the lobbyists function. Let me give you an example. One minister, whom I knew well, had barely had the job a few hours when he telephoned me to ask if I knew who Mr XYZ was. I said that he was head of a well-known private airline. “Well” said the Minister in exasperated tones “he has been turning up at my doorstep every day and I’m not quite sure what to do about it”. A few weeks later, you can imagine my astonishment when I discovered that the Minister and Mr XYZ had become fast friends and were, in fact, quite inseparable. So what, you may well say, if that is how the system works then how is it that a group as powerful as the Tatas could not resort to the same tactics to ensure that their project got passed.

Perhaps, because the Tatas thought that if they abided by the Civil Aviation Ministry’s guidelines they would have no problem getting their proposal through. It is as if I, as Minister of Civil Aviation, were to say to you if you wear a black shirt and green shoes I will let you start an airline. So you come in a black shirt and green shoes and come back time and time again and I continue finding some reason to say no. This may sound like a simplistic analogy but this is, in fact, what happened to the Tatas.

They first applied to start a private airline in February, 1995. they were encouraged to make the application by Narasimha Rao’s government and they decided to do it with Singapore Airlines, giving them a 40 per cent stake.

If you have travelled Singapore Airlines you already know it is one of the best airlines in the world, if you haven’t then take my word for it. At that point the government was allowing foreign equity in airlines so you had Gulf Airways money in Jet and Lufthansa in collaboration with Modiluft. The Tata-Singapore Airlines joint venture was, therefore, in complete accordance with the policy of the moment. But, for 26 months, it somehow never managed to get passed by either the then Minister of Civil Aviation, Ghulam Nabi Azad, nor his successor in the job, Mr C.M. Ibrahim. May I mention that Mr XYZ, that most skilled of airline tycoons, was busy lobbying away in Delhi’s corridors of power to prevent the Tata proposal from taking off. The ministers always found some excuse or other to say no. Azad said there was not enough parking space at our airports for another airline and Ibrahim came up with the patent lie that no country allowed foreigners to invest in their airlines. Ironically, despite the Ministry of Civil Aviation’s obstructiveness, the proposal was cleared by the FIPB (Foreign Investment Proposal Board) in December, 1996.

In April, 1997, in the last Cabinet meeting that Deve Gowda held, after his government was already history since the Congress had withdrawn support, Mr Ibrahim managed to get a one-page policy passed prohibiting foreign airlines from investing in private Indian airlines. Mr XYZ’s lobbying? Who knows?

Undeterred, the Tatas made a new proposal in December, 1997, this time without Singapore Airlines money so once more the proposal was according to the new guidelines. And, once more, the proposal was cleared by the FIPB in January this year. But, then came the BJP government and the new Minister of Civil Aviation refused to allow the airline on the grounds that he was amplifying the one-page policy his predecessor had so hastily passed.

Meanwhile, I hear once more that Mr XYZ had been busy, busy, busy. Lobbying away through an attractive new Rajya Sabha MP, through powerful people in the Prime Minister’s Office and to cut a long story short the Tata proposal continued to be stopped. Until, finally, last Wednesday, they decided enough is enough and they may as well withdraw their proposal.

So, who are the real losers? You and I, dear readers, you and I. We have lost our chance to get a really world class airline. True, Mr XYZ’s airline, and other tiny private airlines, have given Indian Arilines a run for its money so services have improved marginally and air hostesses are no longer as rude as they were. But, the truth is that the government should not be running airlines in the first place. It should be building schools, hospitals and roads. And, if we are going to have a liberalised economy then there must be clear guidelines for everyone, not special case-by-case approvals. That, Mr Prime Minister, would be real transparency. Not what you are giving us now.

Made in India for Indians

by Amita Malik

EVER since I can remember (my father bought his first radio set second-hand from the Governor of Assam in Shillong so he could listen to the BBC) the BBC has projected British culture with its many-faceted international programmes and coverage in different languages for different regions. I should imagine it still has more listeners than viewers in India, many of whom listen to the BBC in their own language. I also remember that I got angry letters from several young listeners when I wrote some time ago that BBC radio is probably now the preserve of the middle-aged and elderly. And now, it has also joined the rat race. It is following in the footsteps of Star Plus, Channel V, MTV, Sony and the rest in sponsoring programmes of local origin in its World Service. Not that Indian performers are suddenly going international, it is strictly made in India for Indians. And I think, in the ultimate analysis, it is a reflection on the insular nature of Indian viewership, that all the satellite channels which came to India with their own cultural and social identity and which gave us so much pleasure and inlets into other cultures, are now having to line up in the desi queue.

Some of the daily 10 p.m. Made in India shows have already been on for some time, such as India Business Report. The BBC has taken care to pick up the top TV people in India. So we have Prannoy Roy with Question Time India. Its stress on politicians, makes it, in my view, far less interesting than Vir Sanghvi’s A Question of Answers, which has a wider range of subjects and hand-picked participants. Question Time should be visiting the regions, surely. Style is barely pulling through mainly because of Rahul Bose’s professionalism. Laila Rouass is not in the same class. I will not comment on Moneywise until I have watched it And so to Wheels. The Alva brothers have specialised in adventure tourism and travelogue. They yet have to establish their credentials as authorities on cars and other vehicles. There was more of charming travelogue than detailed analysis of the Tata Safari. There were amusing vignettes by Ms Navaz. Bhathena on a motor cycle (now we certainly recognise her as an intrepid rallyist) and on car thieves, something on drunken driving. One wonders if Wheels can sustain its analysis of vehicles when so few of them are available in this country, unlike the BBC’s home-grown counterpart where exciting European and American models come in dozens. It must not remain a pleasant travelogue.

If there is one programme that impresses, it is Mastermind India. Not just because of its assured quizmaster, the one and only Siddharta Basu, but also the staggering number of masterminds in this country (the winner in the first one was from Guwahati) who are no less impressive than their counterparts in Britain. As an Indian, one felt proud of them. This is the one programme I welcome wholeheartedly.

My most pleasant surprise last week was to find that a last Aaj Tak has come up with a programme worth watching and an anchor to go with it. Delhi Aaj Tak is anchored by Dibang, one of the most reliable reporters I know, who has a pleasant, modest screen presence and who has not been used enough so far. His newly-recruited girl reporters mostly tend to speak too fast, shout and become shrill, but Dibang’s wide choice of items are tackled with verve. He even throws in a cinema story and crime in Delhi. Well done, Dibang.

Mr Kejriwal, the acting CEO of Prasar Bharati has been shouting his credentials and ideas from the roof-tops when he should really be behind the camera. But at heart he is a proper sarkari Central Information Service man and this was evident in DD’s very first news bulletin after he took over, which had a surfeit of the PM has said, the Finance Minister has said, and, of course the I and B Minister has said. Which is precisely what our thought-control Minister wants and a shape of things to come. Rajat Sharma’s interview with the P.M. popped up on different channels every few hours even four days after its first telecast. Not one Rajat’s best. The politicians, terror smiled and smiled but would not be a villain. It was too cosy for words. In any case, TV is not the PM’s forte. He is at his best addressing the masses or his party conferences with those long pauses. But on TV it all falls very flat. And constant replays made it worse. I think both Karan Thapar and Saeed Naqvi would have made a better job of it.

75 YEARS AGO
Amritsar disturbances

THE Anjuman-i-Islamia, Amritsar, has issued a long detailed statement concerning the causes of the recent disturbances in Amritsar and has tried to throw the entire blame for the unhappy outbreaks of April and May last on the Hindu community.

It describes the disturbances and the present estrangement between the Hindus and the Mohammedans to the hue and cry of the Hindu Press against the Malabar disturbances, and the writings of Prof Gulshan Rai.

The Multan riots gave the Hindus a pretext for avenging themselves upon the Mohammedans against the so-called Moplah excesses in Malabar.

Pandit Malaviyaji, it says, further fanned the fire by laying the entire blame for the Multan riots at the door of Mohammedans alone and by urging by his speeches of 24th September at Amritsar and 25th September at Lahore the Hindus to organise, arm and stand up against the hooligan elements when the latter showed signs of mischief.

The Hindu Sangathan Movement, according to the Anjuman-i-Islamia was started by Malaviyaji with the sole object of crushing the Mohammedans. Other Hindu leaders emulated Malaviyaji and began delivering speeches urging the Hindus to unite and stand up against the Mohammedans.

Even “Nav Jiwan’’, the organ of Mahatma Gandhi, advised the Hindus that they should make themselves physically strong so that the Mohammedans may not dare to attack them. The Hindu Press published these inflammatory speeches and writings and became the cause of the disturbances. In the end it reiterates that the Hindus started Akharas for physical exercise, took training in “lath bazi’’ and organised “samities’’. All these things bore their fruit in the Hindu-Mohammedan riot.