Sir — Another egg on didi’s face. Keshpur has been revived, but instead of sending his team to inquire into the rural mayhem that once prompted Mamata Banerjee to hold an exhibition on it in the capital, L.K. Advani has decided to despatch his men to take a peek into Calcutta’s reeking ghats (“Advani to clean Calcutta blot”, Oct 7). Naturally, Trinamoolis are reading out loudly what Sudip Bandopadhyay has chosen to write on the wall with this unilateral victory of his. But leave aside this nasty bit of party politics. Let us ask both Advani and Bandopadhyay one question. Why have they chosen to concentrate on this most insignificant part of the metro? Is it because Alimuddin Street won’t really mind “Central”-Trinamooli intervention on the riverside? Or is it because Bandopadhyay wished to humble not only didi but also her mayor, under whose jurisdiction the ghats fall? One other thing. If Calcuttans really had Rs 30 crore, they would want it spent on roads more than on the ghats.

Yours faithfully,
K. Mahato, Calcutta

Fullstops in India

Sir — Long before the talks on disinvestment began, a cartoon on one of the national dailies showed the head of a public sector unit which had shut down trying to impress the visiting minister by saying, “We substantially reduced our losses, after stopping production completely!”

Thanks to the minister for disinvestment, Arun Shourie, Bharat Aluminium Company Limited was successfully disinvested in Chhattisgarh, despite Ajit Jogi’s irresponsible and sometimes comic attempts to sabotage the plan. Balco is now touted as the showpiece of Chhattisgarh’s economy. Yet, Shourie must be a bitter man today. The Swadeshi Jagran Manch’s objection to National Aluminium Company’s privatization, Pramod Mahajan’s alleged instigation of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited to corner the privatized Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited, Ram Naik and George Fernandes raising the bogey of “strategic interests” to upset the disinvestment of the oil sector PSUs have made the entire process a laughing stock before the world. K.D. Malviya, Union deputy minister for natural resources more than four decades ago, considered the dominant role of private oil companies a security threat to our strategic interests and nationalized them. Then India was meeting half its crude oil requirement from its own domestic sources. Now India’s share of the domestic market has shrunk to 15 per cent. India had made a serious strategic mistake.

Shourie has pointed out quite logically that the government of the day can commandeer any facility, including privatized oil companies, if it felt the need to do so. But leaders with myopic vision and fossilized thinking abound, irrespective of ideologies. Thus Mallikarjuna Kharge, Karnataka’s Congress legislator and senior minister, eulogizes Jawaharlal Nehru’s policy of mixed economy, even while Karnataka’s public debt has crossed Rs 27,000 crore and 85 of the state owned units are critically sick.

Pushing out Coca-Cola in 1977, touted as a major achievement of Fernandes, did not protect our strategic interests. He and his men should realize that India’s interests are best served when deaths due to starvation cease to occur, meaningful literacy makes India a useful profit centre and the underworld ceases exporting over a quarter million helpless young girls. Funds for such direly needed activities can come only if the Rs 350,000 crore locked up in PSUs is converted into investments.

Yours faithfully,
N. Narasimhan, Bangalore

Sir — Successive governments since the late Eighties have left no stone unturned to be in the good books of the International Monetary Fund. It is heartening that the cabinet is talking some sense now. The rift in the ruling party and the ruling coalition over disinvestment shows that there are serious doubts over the efficacy of the policy. Maybe the disinvestment ministry should be disbanded and a ministry for industrial reconstruction be created with Arun Shourie running it.

Yours faithfully,
Subroto Dutta, Calcutta

Sir — One is glad to know that the chief minister of Orissa, Naveen Patnaik, has at last realized the importance of the state’s loss to his political career. With support from former chief minister, J.B. Patnaik, the incumbent chief minister should seek to join the crusade to stay Nalco’s disinvestment. With increasing pressure from Central ministers, including Uma Bharti, the state’s interest would be protected in the long run.

Yours faithfully,
Lakshman Sekar, Angul

Sir — The editorial, “Reins on reforms” (Sept 10), shows a lot of anxiousness over disinvestment which, together with a reduction in the state’s role in the economy, is supposed to be the necessary condition for economic reforms. But can a government go ahead with a policy over which its allies have little faith? There is no doubt that the policy will concentrate economic power in the hands of a minority. But where is the government’s commitment to creating 10 million jobs? It cannot ignore its responsibility to provide employment to its people.

Yours faithfully,
Suprakash Daschoudhury,

Guwahati

Sir — In one fell swoop, the swadeshi lobby has upset the entire disinvestment process. Atal Bihari Vajpayee may muscle-flex for now, but is unlikely to be able to turn the tide. Statistics show that of a total workforce of 350 million in India, the PSUs account for only 2 million. During the last 10 years, even without strategic disinvestment, this workforce has been reduced to 1.7 million. Which in other words means that privatization does not have much to do with the retrenchment of workers. The government is likely to take more such populist measures given the forthcoming elections which would be suicidal for the economy.

Yours faithfully,
Niloy Sinha, Murshidabad

Parting shot

Sir — I am a citizen of the United States of America, but was born and raised in Calcutta before I migrated about 15 years ago. I flew into Calcutta after a gap of 4 years on August 13, 2002 on the Singapore Airlines from New York as my father was very ill. I was asked at the immigration counter in Calcutta why my father’s name was not on my passport, although US passports never have fathers’ names on it. I was then asked to show my green card but I told the person at the counter that green card was a requirement if one carried a passport other than an American one. US citizens do not carry green cards. I was held up for two hours during which I was interrogated by everyone at the counter, including one supervisor. My question is why don’t the personnel at the immigration have enough information about international passports?

Yours faithfully,
Manjit Singh, New York