This debate is rather fascinating since it assumes that Indian polity has a clue to the conflicts of interest going.
Coalition politics has grossly undermined the predominance of the PMO
R Vaidyanathan
The T R Baalu episode, wherein he nonchalantly declared in Parliament that he pleaded the case of his sons’ companies, has shocked many an editorial writer and other experts. The discussions focus on the issue people in positions of power of showing favour to their kith and kin.
This debate is rather fascinating since it assumes that Indian polity has a clue to the conflicts of interest going.
Earlier, the prime minister appointed his council of ministers and had some choice in deciding the persons.
That system has been altered under the coalition arrangement; now, the coalition partners decide the person to be appointed to the specific ministry.
In an earlier case, Dayanidhi Maran was appointed to the telecommunication ministry in spite of the fact that his immediate family had large business interests in the visual media, in this era of convergence. The local level channel distribution was in the hands of his brother in Tamil Nadu and parts of other states in South India. At that time, no eyebrows were raised regarding the conflict of interest since cable connectivity is critical in broadband services also.
More important is the development when the current incumbent, Raja, was appointed to the ministry after the fall from grace of Maran. The announcement regarding the appointment of Raja as telecommunication minister was made from Chennai by the DMK party and not from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) at Delhi. This was the first time in Independent India that a Cabinet appointment was not announced from the capital city but from far South. It was not felt as a deviation from established norms since we have become norm-less in this era of regional zamindars and local talukdars. Delhi is not holding any more.
The second part of the growing irrelevance of the PMO is the non-submission of reports of foreign trips by ministers of different departments — particularly those belonging to regional parties. The convention is for ministers to submit a report to the prime minister’s secretariat at the end of a foreign tour. It has not been done in the past few years and the concerned ministers have not been pulled up by the PMO during their official trips to various countries in Europe and the Middle East. Some of the ministers have made “private “or “personal trips” to many tax heavens and the reports on these trips have also not been provided to the PMO.
It would be an interesting exercise for some enterprising journalists to ask for the details of foreign travel “deviations” by the ministers in the last four years and try to infer the type of activities indulged in by them in the absence of official reports to the PMO.
Many business barons are sitting in the Rajya Sabha and there are no clear cut guidelines for them to ask questions pertaining to their business interests. There were reports recently in all the important English newspapers that two major private airlines made all the arrangements for the marriage of the aviation minister’s daughter. There was neither a customary denial of the report, nor any critical editorial.
It is extraordinary that elementary principles of conflict of interests are no more taken seriously.
In the process, one interesting aspect of the Baalu episode has been completely ignored. That is pertaining to the silence of the petroleum ministry on the eight successive reminder from the PMO about looking into Baalu’s grievance and help “poor shareholders” of his sons’ company. This clearly indicates the eroding legitimacy of the PMO in enforcing its diktat on the other ministries.
We are not suggesting that the PMO should impose its own wishes, but we are only suggesting that the PMO deserves a response for its eight reminders in as many days.
Family-run enterprises are the norm today and as we have suggested in earlier articles, regional political parties are nothing but another type of family business. Hence, to talk of conflicts of interest is esoteric and meaningless.
The author is Professor of Finance, Indian Institute of Management - Bangalore, and can be contacted at vaidya@iimb.ernet.in.
Views are personal.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}