The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

THE TRIBUNE INTERVIEW

by Raj Chengappa, Editor-in-Chief
‘There is now some clear air between India and Australia’
— Peter N. Varghese, Australian High Commissioner to India

Photo: Pradeep Tewari

A spate of attacks against Indians living in Australia in the recent past saw relations between the two countries plummet. There was a growing perception that many of these attacks were racially motivated and that these were signs of an intolerant Australia. Though the Australian government has taken steps to bring the situation under control, the concerns remain. Both sides are now busy repairing the damage and beginning to focus on the larger issue of improving bilateral relations between India and Australia. External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna is to travel this week to Australia to discuss some of these issues. On a visit to Chandigarh, the Australian High Commissioner, Peter N. Varghese, 53, who is of Indian origin, spoke at length to Raj Chengappa, Editor-in-Chief, on a range of issues concerning the two countries. Excerpts:

Though the spate of attacks against Indians in Australia has abated, the concerns remain. What has the government done to address the issue?

We took a lot of steps over the last 12 months or so to try and address this issue. There was a law enforcement element. There was a resourcing element. They went into the registration of these institutions. They went into monitoring compliance. We have made some very big changes which are directly related to the Indian students' issue and our migration programme. We have tightened up the skill and occupation list which seeks to distinguish more clearly between migration and education objectives. All of our efforts taken together have had an impact and now the situation is much calmer and there is a better understanding on both sides about what has happened, what we are dealing with, what the drivers are and what the implications are. There is now some clear air in our bilateral relationship and we can focus on the bigger agenda between Australia and India.

Do you have details about the number of attacks that occurred and the nature
of these, especially with regard to the
racial factor?

It is difficult as we do not have a really thorough empirical data base to deal with because our police forces don't collect the district-based data on nationality and occupation. So if you wanted to say how many of these attacks on Indian students occurred, what the circumstances were, it is a complicated picture and we did not think for the most part these attacks were driven by racial factors. We acknowledged that there clearly were some cases where racism would appear to be a motivator. But for most part these have been opportunist crimes, either as a result of excessive consumption of alcohol or an intention to rob and steal. We now also have a better understanding of the fact that the Indian students, particularly in Melbourne, were actually in a higher-risk profile category. By that I mean, because of the part-time work, they did mainly shift work, driving taxis early in the morning. Because of financial reasons they were under pressure to live in cheaper accommodation, which was a high-crime neighbourhood. Because many of them preferred to be paid in cash rather than through the payroll system and most of them were young males. It was a combination of factors that all came together and conveyed a mistaken impression in the mind that Indians were being excessively singled out for racial bashings whereas a lot of these were ugly examples of crime.

Has this had an impact on the number of Indians going to Australia?

We see a radical decline in numbers. I think the numbers are likely to decrease overall by 80 per cent. I would not say that this is directly a result of people being deterred from going to Australia. The bigger factor for the drop in numbers is the changes we have made to our skill migration programme. Earlier, a large number of the students were going in for courses like hair dressing and cookery; now that we have removed those from the list of skills that will give extra points for migration, the incentive has diminished. So, the drop in numbers is the result of a number of reasons rather than just the deterrent factor. There may be some cases where parents may have decided against sending their children in the light of publicity that these attacks attracted. But the reason for the radical reduction is the changes we have made in our policy.

Will the new policy change the educational ties the two countries have?

We are now refocusing our education relationship. We want to rebuild it on the foundation of the university course so that it is linked to a genuine desire to study at a quality institution and that is going to be our objective. Part of that will also involve strengthening the institution-to-institution links so that our universities can develop better links with Indian universities and that in turn may generate collaborative research work and encourage particularly post-graduate students in India to think about Australia because our university sector is of a high quality. We have in Australia eight or nine — depending on which survey you read — of the top hundred universities. In terms of comparative value for money and also quality for education, Australia still stands up pretty well.

Are some of the policy changes because Indians were supposedly stealing jobs from Australians?

I don't think the stealing of jobs was a factor in this. I know some commentary has suggested that might have been the case, but bear this in mind that the period what we are talking about was a period of very strong economic growth for Australia and low on employment. I do not think that the resentment factor played a role because our economy was running at a very fast clip and if anything we were facing labour shortage. Of course, that line of analysis assumes that the attacks were generated by resentment as opposed to other crimes.

What did you do to beef up the security for students?

Some straight-out law-enforcement steps have been taken. We have increased the number of policemen, particularly those covering railway stations and so-called crime hotspots. We have put in place new community liaison procedures so that the police has an opportunity to talk to members of the Indian community and Indian students about prudent things to do in terms of behaviour like where not to go, how to look out for your own safety and other common sense solutions.

We set up 24-hour hotlines so that students could ring up, if they had any concerns, not necessarily safety concerns but any sort of concerns. We increased the briefings that we provide students before they left India. We produced a new briefing booklet for students that was given to them at the time that they got their visa papers and we made an effort to try and ensure that private institutions also took more seriously their duty of care to their students. Then we addressed the issue of some 'shonky' (Australian slang for dubious) colleges. We had colleges operating that ought not be operating and some of them we have closed down. We just withdrew their registration and licensing. Others, of course, ran into financial difficulties as the numbers began to drop and had to close themselves down. So that part of the issue was also addressed.

What about the migration aspect?

We have made changes to our migration programme. The last were not driven by this particular set of problems. It was a result of a thorough review of whether our migration programme was actually meeting our labour market demand. We found that it was not doing so. What we concluded was that there was too much supply-driven programme and not enough demand-driven programme and that is what we are doing now. We are shifting the balance now towards a demand-driven programme. Every year we will now update the list of skills that we require and it's a much, much smaller list than that used to be. Earlier, the list was of over 400 (skills) and now it is about 100. So, these are the changes — some small and some big. But overall it's had an impact.

You have tightened your visa policy too?

We don’t run quotas. We have a criteria-based visa policy. If you meet the criteria, you will get the visa. We have introduced a much more rigorous checking process to satisfy ourselves that the applicants and the documentation are genuine. And that means the rejection rate of visas has also gone up as a result because we have detected cases of fraud and of misleading information.

Coming to a different area, has there been a change in Australia's approach to selling uranium to India's civilian nuclear power plants with the new government coming in?

In 2007, the (John) Howard government had changed Australian policy in order to permit the export of uranium to India. The (Kevin) Rudd government, when it came to power, reflecting very long-standing Labour Party policy, said that it would not sell uranium to India because India is not a party to the NPT. As we have explained many times before that it is not an anti-India policy, it is a pro-NPT policy and that remains the case at the moment.

What about the growth of trade between India and Australia which is now round $ 20 billion but the balance continues to be unfavourable to India?

We have an average 25 per cent growth a year in the trade relationship in the last five years and I think the prospects for growth are good. It is the case that the trade balance is very much in Australia's favour. But the upside is that the big-ticket items in what we sell to India are all items, with the exception of gold, which go directly to the capacity of the Indian economy to grow. In other words, Australia is feeding Indian growth in a way that is very much in India's interests.

The other point is, by and large, Australia runs a very open market so it is not as if we are running a protectionist policy which is shutting out Indian goods. Now part of growing the trade relationship to the benefit of both countries should involve starting negotiations on a free trade agreement. We have now completed a joint feasibility study endorsed by both governments that came out in favour of FTA negotiations. I hope the two governments will be in a position in the reasonably near future to start negotiations because that will send a very good signal to our respective business communities that the two governments take the economic relationship seriously and want to push it along.

There is a perception that Australia has a decided tilt towards China in Asia with respect to India?

I think that is a misperception. The reality is that we see a congruence of strategic interests between Australia and India, which has never been there before and I think we can build on that very substantially. I think the view that Australia is leaning too far towards China is fundamentally mistaken. Our relationship with China in its broad contours is no different from the relationship that many other countries, including India, has with China. We both seek a constructive relationship with China, we both seek to maximise the economic benefit of the relationship and we both are careful observers of the strategic implications of China's rise. India and Australia have a connection as open liberal democracies, which adds a certain character to our bilateral relationship. India and Australia have a shared interest in wanting to see not just China play a constructive role in the region but precisely because we are democracies and we have a shared interest in wanting to see the balance of power in Asia remain favourable to open democratic countries. I see a large measure of strategic common ground vis-`E0-vis China between Australia and India as I do between Australia and many other regional countries because all of us are dealing with a similar set of challenges.

You seem to have an expanding military relationship with Pakistan?

We are training a number of Pakistani military personnel in counter-terrorism at our staff colleges. Neither of us wants the destablisation of Pakistan. The terrorist groups are going out of control there. None of the training programmes we have for Pakistani troops include that of any lethal weapons. The training and weapons given to Pakistani troops do not go against India or any other country.

OPED

The web of corruption
Centre must take the bull by its horns
by G. P. Joshi & Maja Daruwala

At the Congress Party’s 83 rd Plenary recently, Mrs Sonia Gandhi said that with her five-point agenda, her party will take on corruption “head-on”. Perhaps it is time. In less than a year and a half, the UPA government’s credibility has been badly dented, with major scams tumbling out of the government’s cupboard.

The government has been pusillanimous in not taking the bull by its horns and stopping corruption. Even as it scores one self goal after another, it has arrogantly refused to own up culpability for obvious fumbles: the foulest being Mr P.J. Thomas’ appointment as the Central Vigilance Commissioner. Mr Thomas may be innocent, unwitting and caught up in other people’s messes. But he has been charge-sheeted. And now he is the anointed czar for stopping corruption. This is not good. It can’t go on. It needs some response.

Unbounded corruption needs both words and action from the hallowed in the party. Rahul Gandhi has walked across rural India incessantly talking about bridging the gap between the rich and the poor. He must recall his father’s confession that just 15 paise out of every rupee spent for the betterment of the poor reaches them. While Rajiv Gandhi was talking about corruption and mismanagement, decades later, it is still not too late for his son to go from lament to action. Clearly, ostrich-like inactivity of the government and the party will not feed the poor. In the days of right to information, competitive investigative mass media and an opposition on the warpath, hoping that this or that new storm of accusation will pass is not going to happen.

When the noise level becomes deafening and repeated spin statements don’t work, the maximum that is done is to make too late raids, belatedly ask the offending politician to step down and if it is a senior bureaucrat to shift the person from one position to another; always with the sanguine statement that law will take its own course — which it invariably fails to do.

Law in most cases fails to take its proper course, primarily because the justice system is cumbersome, dilatory and irrevocably flawed; anti-corruption agencies cannot function effectively because they have been politicised and rendered effete and finally because the law itself provides large enough loopholes through which public servants can slip and so helps the guilty to escape unharmed.

The Central Bureau of Investigation is the most prominent anti-corruption enforcement agency at the Central level. But the CBI has to obtain prior sanction of the head of the ministry or department before it can undertake any inquiry or investigation against any officer of the rank of Joint Secretary and above in the Central Government, including those in the public sector undertakings and nationalised banks. Without such sanction no inquiry —not even one the CBI calls a preliminary enquiry — can be conducted.

This provision was earlier a part of executive instructions but was given a statutory wrap by the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003: this despite the fact that the Supreme Court had declared exactly these obstacles to investigation null and void in the Hawala case judgement.The main objective of these sanction gateways is to protect the decision making level officers from the threat and ignominy of malicious and vexatious inquiries so that they can take their decisions without fear of being victimised. However, it is hard to escape the conclusion that in a large number of cases, the provision of law is used to shield pliable officers from inquiry and save government embarrassment.

The most recent case is that of a senior officer of the National Highways Authority of India, where the CBI had to ask the Cabinet Secretary to transfer him to his parent cadre when it was denied permission by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to probe into allegations of corruption made against him.

Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, also requires the police agency to obtain sanction from the concerned government before prosecuting public servants involved in corruption cases. In many cases, there is considerable delay in receiving sanction and in some it never comes. This, too, had caused the Supreme Court concern and in the Hawala case, it ruled that the maximum limit of three months to grant sanction must be strictly followed.

Not satisfied by tearing a big hole in the anti-corruption net for catching serving officers, in 2008 bureaucrats tried to extend the scope of Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, by including even retired public servants within the ambit of these clogs on investigation and prosecution. This would have completely undone the judgement of the 2006 Supreme Court in Badal v. State of Punjab in which it held that Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, did not protect former public servants. Luckily, the amendment was not ratified by the Rajya Sabha even though it cleared the Lok Sabha.

The bottlenecks created by the need for sanction and inordinate delays in obtaining it seriously impede bold and swift action by anti-corruption agencies but also defeats the ends of justice. These create an overall atmosphere that ensures that wicked people have the leeway to play fast and loose with the money and discretions within their power.

As if these two gateways for sanction before investigation and another before prosecution were not enough, a third protection under Section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code permits the government to withdraw the case with the court’s permission. Illustratively, the government used this provision to close cases against Captain Satish Sharma, a senior Congress leader against whom the CBI had instituted cases pertaining to alleged irregularities in allotment of petrol pumps and gas agencies during his tenure as Union Petroleum Minister between 1993 and 1996.

Just as Mrs Gandhi has asked Congress Chief Ministers and ministers to give up their discretionary powers, amongst other things her government must do to deal with corruption is to quickly review and amend the laws that shield the bad and leave us to suffer the consequences.

G.P. Joshi is a former Director (R&D), Bureau of Police Research and Development and Maja Daruwala is Director, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, New Delhi

On Record
‘Naming the superbug after Delhi an error’
by Aditi Tandon

Dr Richard Horton

The world of medicine knows liver specialist Richard Horton best as Editor-in-Chief of the British medical journal The Lancet which he joined in 1990 as Assistant Editor. Since 1995, he has been focusing research on the emerging public health challenges of our times and on nations whose health statuses have the potential to impact global health.

This year The Lancet, under Horton, roped in Indian researchers to produce The Lancet India series titled India: Towards Universal Health Coverage which was presented last week to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, ahead of preparations for the Twelfth Five Year Plan. The report calls for enhanced public spending in health to cover the last poorest man on the street. He speaks to The Tribune about India’s health priorities and why The Lancet recently singled out New Delhi by naming a new drug-resistant superbug after it. Excerpts:

Q: Why did you name the superbug after New Delhi? The move was slammed as discriminatory across India’s medical sector.

A: It was a huge mistake and an error of judgement on our part. It unnecessarily singled out a city and a country and deflected attention away from science behind the research which was strong and sound. We didn’t think about implications of the move for which I sincerely apologise.

Q: What does The Lancet-India Series report signify?

A: Of late, The Lancet has been focusing its attention on health challenges being faced by certain countries across the world. We did a similar series on South Africa. The Indian report is crucial and highlights India’s gains and its predicament. The economic growth this country has achieved is remarkable. But what is the point of growth if there is nothing in it for the poor? India needs a social movement for health.

Q: Where does the government figure in the attainment of right to health enshrined in the Indian Constitution?

A: The government spends just 1 per cent of the GDP on health as against 9 per cent in the UK. The Report calls for the creation of National Health Service through increased public spending in health and reduced reliance on the private sector. India needs a public health cadre to make health services accessible to the poorest.

Q: What percentage of the GDP should the government spend on health?

A: The world over, nations are struggling to figure out this problem. There is no magic figure but somewhere between 5 and 7 per cent of the GDP looks desirable for India.

Q: The government is investing considerably in the health sector especially the flagship National Rural Health Mission. Where else does the priority lie?

A: The Lancet India report shows India is poised to enter an epoch similar to the Partition. In 1970, its under-five mortality rate was 200 per one thousand live births. Last year it was 63. That is an astonishing decline. Over 1.2 million physicians in the world today are of Indian origin. As I said, India faces a predicament – of growth on the one side and poverty and health inequity on the other. The priorities should be – a national health service financed by taxation and insurance; more doctors and paramedics; and reduced private out-of-pocket expenses.

Q: How do you view the NRHM? The Lancet recently researched the outcomes of Janani Suraksha Yojana, the NRHM’s cash transfer scheme to improve institutional delivery rates. Has it worked?

A: The NRHM is a fantastic idea but we don’t know how good or bad it is. There is lack of evaluation of the scheme. The JSY has shown slight improvements. So far as the NRHM goes, there is no convincing evidence to conclude that it has been a national success story yet.

Q: India’s population has been cited as a major concern. Globally, what has been the role of family planning in maximising health gains?

A: Family planning has been responsible for some tremendous successes in health across the world. In fact, globally we need a new era of family planning and no matter how sensitive a political issue it might be, the governments must embrace it in policy. Sex education at school is an absolute necessity.

Profile
Razdan’s courage overpowers his disability
by Harihar Swarup

Maj-Gen Sunil K. Razdan

This is the story of the Indian Army’s first paraplegic Major-General. Sixteen years back, Sunil Kumar Razdan, a young army officer, was part of a crack team in Kashmir, sent to rescue 14 women, between 14 and 30, captured by the Lakshar-e-Toiba.

What was supposed to be a silent operation, became slightly noisy, as women whispered and chatted, alerting the militants. He killed two of them and the third fell face up. Razdan thought he too was dead but he fired; the shot going through his abdomen, spilling out intestines. Razdan’s spine broke and yet he shot the third militant dead.

Amazingly, Razdan found the energy to be part of the 16-hour gun battle that ensued, sustaining himself on self-administered intravenous drips. It is only after nine other militants were shot dead that he was airlifted to a field hospital. Women were evacuated through a kitchen window. He was operated thrice and had to remain in hospital for a year.

During his treatment in the hospital, he realised that he would never be able to walk again and, subsequently, he came to terms with reality. He was later awarded the Kirti Chakra and became a Brigadier.

Razdan’s name was subsequently recommended for two-star rank. His eventual promotion, however, depended on whether or not a vacancy arose for a Major-General’s post before he retired. He was supposed to be superannuated in October 2010. As it happened, a vacancy did open up and the Brigadier is now a Major-General.

The Army preferred to see Razdan’s skills rather than his disability. He is now Assistant Chief of the Integrated Defence Staff (IDS). His specialty is counter-insurgency. Despite work pressure, he actively pursues several hobbies. He goes to the Rajputana Rifles’ range regularly. He can shoot from any position, except sitting on his haunches.

When his posting order came, the general reaction was why are we getting a guy in a wheel chair? Today, the overwhelming reaction is that Major-General Razdan should not go anywhere; he must stay with the IDS. Sure enough, that is where he will stay until he retires two years from now, focussing on issues such as insurgency and welfare.

He is a whiz with gadgets. He once designed a gun that could be fired by a solar-powered battery of a calculator. He has a demanding schedule, often returning home by 8.30 p.m. The Major-General does not take lunch. He dines at 9 p.m, the meal preceded by a couple of pegs of his favourite scotch.

For Razdan, physical activity is an integral part of his life on and off duty. A long distance runner since his adolescence, he had been nicknamed ‘Greyhound’. He was also an obsessive bicker. His wife Manju recalls: “I remember him going from Delhi to Agra on a bullet motorcycle in just two hours.

According to Army rules, any injury or disability, suffered in war, counter-terrorism or any other operation, which is called a ‘battle casualty’, does not come in the way of any soldier in his promotion as long as he is capable of performing his duties. Take for instance the case of Lt-Gen Pankaj Joshi, who passed away in 2009.

Commissioned into Gorkha Rifles in 1962, he lost his legs during a mine-cleaning operation in Sikkim in 1967. But through his grit after becoming a ‘battle casualty’, he went on to command an armoured division and a corps before becoming the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Lucknow-based Central Army Command.

Gen Joshi came to be known in the Army as a General without legs, a General with a laptop, a strategic thinker and an Army genius. He carried a laptop as his constant companion on which he produced papers on defence.

The 1.13-million strong Indian, in fact, has also had a disabled Lieutenant-General as its Vice-Chief. Lt-Gen Vijay Oberoi, who lost one of his legs during an operation as a young officer, served as the Vice-Chief of Army Staff in 2000-2001 after first serving as the Director-General of Military Operations, a strike corps commander and the chief of the Chandi Mandir-based Western Army Command.