2G, CAG AND THE PRIME MINISTER
There has been never an issue in recent memory which was as assiduosly fought in the media for perceived probity in Public life asthe spectrums allocation issue. The visual media painted a hapless Telecom Minister A Raja as corrupt even before a verdict is pronounced by probing agencies and has absolved the larger role of the Prime Minister for which Supreme Court has made a shocking observation for his inaction over a period of two years- obviously for which scam he is also equally culpable notwithstanding the aura of Mr.Clean Image.
CAG is a constitutional authority mandated to find if Public money is spent effectively for purposes they are intended and voted by the Parliament.It this time has exceeded its brief by arrogating itself to the role of a corporate investment banker for valuation of stock when it talked about the presumptive losses sustained as a result of allotment of spectrum through a questionable - nevertheless cabinet approved New Telecom Policy running into lakhs of crores of rupees. The logic used is the valuation fetched for partial off loading of shares of some Private companies upon allotment of spectrum.Valuation of stocks of Public Companies are a tricky business. They take into account, physical and intangible assets of the Company, the revenue flows and business models, future cash flows, Internal rate of return on investment, future earning potential etc.While the spectrum constitutes a part of the intangible asset, by itself will not lead in to over valuation of the stock. This is a flawed logic.
there is another allegation that the Telecom Minister ignored the advisory sent by Prime Minister's office.PMO is no constitutional authority. It can not arrogate to itself the power to issue advisories and statements on policy matters approved by Cabinet or EGoM.The Minister was well within his constitutional right to reject any such advisory whereas the Minister had replied to the advisory in detail The advisory itself stems up from complaints fromcorporate lobbies felt let down by the allotment of spectrum.
The role of R Com in the murky episode completes the link of corporate lobby to the PMO. RCom it is alleged used Swan Telecom as a frontal organisation to get access to more spectrum.Thepermission given to CMDA operators to tread in to GSM is also criticised inthe report. These actions raise a suspicision. It was Amar Singh of SP who bailed out UPA-I when they faced a sure defeat in the nuclear issue following withdrawl of support by Left parties. Anil Ambani of RCom is an elected Rajya Sabha Member of SP. You can read the quid pro quo.
If indeed it was Prime Minister's advisory which was rebuffed by the Minister he could have exercised his authority to dismiss him or sought his removal.He did notdo it.
There is an attempt to clear the Prime Minister from this issue.Prime Minister's perceived integrity should not come in the way of a healthy debate.PM should clear the misgivings about his role and should not simply hide under excuses that he was under politicalcompulsions.The very samePM was willing to go if the Party did not toe his line in the nuclear deal issue and resorted to unfair means of gathering parliamentary support.Wads of currency were shown in Parliament offered to members to switch loyalties on the eve of voting. He has not come clean on that issue.He owes an explanation to the nation.After all in this country, members of parliament went to the well of the house singing in chorus Rajiv Gandhi Chor hai when news of Bofors kick back broke out. It took two decades for a besirmiched Rajiv to redeem his sullen image-that too after his assasination. Arun Jaitley took satisfaction in listing Rajiv in Bofors trial as accused not sent for trial even after his tragic assasination.
Some in the media credited Jayalalitha for having organised Raja's exit through her offer for support should DMK walk out of the coalitionwhich offer was rejected with contempt.The PM while reacting to this referred to Jayalalitha as Dr.Jayalalitha signifying his liking for her and her party.
PM's press advisor of yesteryears Sanjay Barua observed in NDTV that PM stood vindicated for his position of not taking Raja and Baalu inhis council of Ministers inthe first place. A PM who carries with him ministers to the likes of Sharad Pawar can not be choosy about tainted Ministers.If in deed he had views against them he should have stood his ground. carrying on a vilification campaign is in bad taste.
Manish Tiwari - congress spokes person brought tolight the fact that CAG had infact indicted two former Telecom Ministers for their alleged role in scams of equal magnitude forthe losses observed then were substantive and not presumptive. The allegations of quid pro quo when operators were permitted to migrate from fixed licence regime to revenue sharing regime were levelled when Atal Behari Vajpayee wasPM.
The entire saga of 2G has been targetting an individual minister for corporate lobbies. The larger conspiracy behind this episode needs to be unearthed.
|
|
