[Marxistindia] PB Communique

marxistindia
news from the cpi(m)

March 26, 2010

PRESS COMMUNIQUÉ

The Polit Bureau of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) met in New Delhi on March 25, 2010. It has issued the following statement:

The Polit Bureau took stock of the overall political situation in the country and discussed developments connected to the budget session of parliament.

The Polit Bureau was of the opinion that the Union Budget of 2010 is of a pro-big business, pro-rich orientation. This is evident from fact that Rs. 80,000 crore tax concessions have been given to the corporates and on the other hand there is a Rs 3000 crore cut in fertilizer subsidy and Rs. 400 crore cut in food subsidy. Direct taxes have been reduced and there is an across the board increase in indirect taxes which burden the common man. A particularly objectionable feature is the increase in the excise and customs duties for petrol and diesel which alone amounts to Rs. 26,000 crore. Instead of taking steps to curb price rise, these measures are going to fuel inflation.

The Polit Bureau demanded that the government rescind the increase in customs and excise duties for petrol and diesel. If this is not done, the Party will move a cut motion on the Finance Bill in this regard. The Party will hold consultations with all the secular opposition parties to coordinate the opposition to the Budget provisions.

RETROGRADE LEGISLATIONS

Nuclear Liability Bill: The Polit Bureau reiterated its firm and total opposition to the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill. The CPI(M) was the first to point out the harmful provisions in this Bill which have been devised in the interests of the American companies who wish to sell nuclear reactors to India. Neither the exemption of liability for the foreign suppliers of nuclear equipment nor the cap on the liability for the operator can be supported.

The Polit Bureau expressed satisfaction that a large number of parties cutting across the political spectrum have come out against the Bill which does not safeguard the lives and the interests of the people.

Food Security Legislation: The Polit Bureau expresses its strong opposition to the present version of the Food Security Bill as a travesty of food security. In its present form it will create food insecurity. Instead of enhancing entitlements it reduces them as follows: present quota of 35 kg is cut to 25 kg; Antodaya entitlement is not specified at all; APL cardholders, i.e. those earning more that Rs. 12 a day, are totally eliminated. Even the price of the reduced quota is not fixed. The proposal of cash transfer of subsidy is objectionable and will mean putting consumers at the mercy of the market at a time when food inflation is extraordinarily high. Worst of all, it accepts the totally flawed estimates of poverty by the Planning Commission as the basis of entitlement which excludes vast numbers of the poor from the subsidized food entitlements. In a disturbing addition, the draft Bill wants specific identification of BPL even in presently universalized programmes such as NREGA, ICDS, Mid-Day meal schemes which is unwarranted and unnecessary unless the government has a future plan of curbing universal access to these schemes. The CPI(M) demands that the government withdraw this anti-poor Bill and come up with a legislation for a universal PDS with entitlements of at least 35 kg of foodgrains at Rs. 2 a kilo. This will be below 2 per cent of the GDP, much less than the amount of tax forgone in each of the last few budgets.

Education Bills: The Polit Bureau strongly criticized the Foreign Education Providers Bill proposed to be introduced in parliament. Allowing foreign direct investment and foreign teaching shops into the country will distort the already elitist educational structure in the country. It will make education more commercial and there will be no regulation or control over such institutions. The CPI(M) will lend its full support to the struggle of the teachers, students and education community against this Bill.

In this connection, the Polit Bureau noted that the UPA government is seeking to centralize all powers within the educational sphere to the detriment of the states. The proposal to set up a Commission for Higher Education & Research is one major step in this direction. The UPA government is behaving as if education is not a concurrent subject. The Polit Bureau called upon the government not to move ahead with the setting up of this Commission till all the state governments and all those who have a vital stake in higher education are consulted and their views taken on board.

WOMEN'S RESERVATION BILL

The Polit Bureau welcomed the adoption of the Women's Reservation Bill in the Rajya Sabha. The Government should bring the Bill in the Lok Sabha in this session itself for adoption. The Party rejects some of the criticism and comments directed against the Bill which is coloured by sexist and male chauvinist attitudes.

APRIL 8 PROTEST ACTION

The Polit Bureau heard reports of the preparations for the Left parties mass picketing and court arrest programme on April 8 on the issues of price rise, land and employment. Given the big response to the call, the Polit Bureau is confident that the mass participation will far exceed the target of 25 lakh people. The Polit Bureau called upon all Party units to make the April 8 action a big success.

The PB decided to hold consultations with other secular opposition parties to intensify the anti-price rise movement.

FOREIGN POLICY

The latest development vis-à-vis the "Afpak" policy of the United States has exposed the blind spot in India's foreign policy and the counterproductive nature of the Manmohan Singh government's strategic alliance with the United States. Contrary to the repeated assertions of the Indian government that the United States should stay the course in the fight against the Taliban, both the United Stats and President Hamid Karzai are moving for negotiations with sections of the Taliban to ensure an early exit for the US-Nato forces. Pakistan, whose ISI has close links with the Taliban, has come into the picture for any future negotiated settlement. India has been virtually left out in the cold. The US-Pakistan partnership is being strengthened. A high level US-Pakistan strategic talks has just been concluded in Washington.
The United States is stepping up its military assistance to Pakistan while at the same time it has got the UPA government to buy large scale weaponry worth billions of dollars from it. Even on the vital issue of terrorism, the United States is refusing to have any reciprocity as evident in the manner in which it has denied Indian authorities access to David Headley so far.
The illusion perpetuated by the Manmohan Singh government, since the first tenure of the UPA government, that the United States considers India as its primary strategic ally in the region now stands exposed. The Government must answer why it is embarking on buying billions of dollars of US equipment and getting further tied to the United States when it is amply clear that the Afpak strategy is central for the United States in this region.

RECTIFICATION REPORT

The Polit Bureau had a preliminary discussion on the draft Rectification Report of the Central Committee. It decided to place this report in the next meeting of the Central Committee.

EXTENDED C.C. MEETING

The Polit Bureau discussed the preparations and the time table for holding the extended meeting of the Central Committee in the beginning of August. These proposals will be placed before the next meeting of the Central Committee.

NEXT CC MEETING

The Polit Bureau decided to hold the next meeting of the Central Committee on May 5, 6 & 7, 2010 at New Delhi.

_______________________________________________
Marxistindia mailing list
Marxistindia@cpim.org
http://cpim.org/mailman/listinfo/marxistindia_cpim.org
http://wwww.cpim.org

[Marxistindia] Stop Pussyfooting on Headley Case

marxistindia
news from the cpi(m)
March 20, 2010

Press Statement

The Polit Bureau of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) has issued the following statement:

Stop Pussyfooting on Headley Case

It is six months since David Headley was arrested by the US authorities for his role in terrorist related activities. The plea bargain struck by David Headley in a US Court has seen him pleading guilty to all twelve charges which include complicity in the 26/11 terror attack in Mumbai.

Despite all these, the Indian authorities have been denied access to him. On the other hand, the Indian government allowed the FBI to interrogate Ajmal Kasab in Mumbai.

It has been established that Headley has been an agent for the Drug Enforcement Authority (DEA) of the United States. It is also a fact that he had visited Mumbai both before and after the terrorist attack in 2008. The attitude of the US authorities suggests that he has been a double-agent. It is inexplicable therefore why the UPA government is pussyfooting around the issue with the US administration.

The UPA government is more concerned about justifying the US stance. If access cannot be given to Headley as the issue has already gone to court, why was access not granted earlier when the Indian team was sent to the United States?

The Home Minister knows very well that extradition is ruled out by the plea bargain. Yet, he declares, he is prepared to be patient. The Manmohan Singh government has once again shown how unequal the US-India relationship is. The US is only concerned about its AfPak Strategy. It is not willing to cooperate in an investigation concerning a prime accused of the Mumbai terror attack. Yet the FBI and the CIA have access to all our intelligence and security related material and personnel. The least that the Government of India can do is to demand immediate access to Headley. The US needs to be told that cooperation has to be reciprocal.
_______________________________________________
Marxistindia mailing list
Marxistindia@cpim.org
http://cpim.org/mailman/listinfo/marxistindia_cpim.org
http://wwww.cpim.org

[Marxistindia] Left Parties Appeal to Members of Parliament

marxistindia
news from the cpi(m)
Left Parties' Appeal to Members of Parliament

Do Not Support the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill

Dear Member of Parliament,

The UPA Government is about to introduce the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damages Bill in Parliament. This Bill seeks to cap the liability of nuclear plant operators and the equipment suppliers in case there is an accident involving a nuclear plant.

This legislation is being pushed by the Government because of pressure from the US equipment suppliers and investors put through the US administration at the highest levels. The US has made a precondition that India must put a cap on liability of the nuclear operators and virtually remove all liabilities of the equipment suppliers before it delivers on its promises in the India US Nuclear Deal. That is why the Fuel Reprocessing Consent, claimed to be a done deal by the proponents of the Nuclear Deal has yet to be agreed to by the US. Neither have the dual use technology restrictions been removed as the Prime Minister had claimed before the Parliament.

Salient Features

The salient points in the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damages Bill are:

Ø It allows the foreign reactor suppliers to rake in unlimited profits while transferring their liabilities to the Indian exchequer.

Ø Financial liability for a nuclear accident will be capped at only 300 million SDRs (Rs. 2142.85 crore). Beyond this cap, the affected people will not get any compensation for either loss of life, health damages or damages to property and environment.

Ø The liability of the Indian operator of nuclear plants will be limited to only to Rs. 500 crore. The Central Government can decrease the amount of liability to a minimum of Rs. 100 crore.

Ø The difference between the two - Rs. 2142.85 and Rs. 500 crore, i.e. of about Rs. 1642 crore - is the Government's share of the liability.

Ø There is no legal liability of the foreign reactor supplier even if it supplies faulty and substandard equipment.

Ø Any liability for foreign reactor suppliers can at best be included in private contracts between the suppliers and the Indian operator.

Problematic Provisions

Given that a serious nuclear accident can cause damage in billions, the small cap of 300 million SDRs proposed shows the scant regard the Central Government holds for the Indian people. Any damage beyond this will not be compensated either by the Government or by the nuclear operator, which in the present case is a state operator. Given that accidents like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, the two most well known nuclear accidents in history, have caused billions of worth of damages; this effectively means abandoning the victims in case of a nuclear accident.

The Bhopal Settlement of $470 million (Rs. 2152 crore) reached between the Central Government and Union Carbide and accepted by the Supreme Court, has proved to be totally inadequate. Even today, lakhs of gas victims are suffering and have received only meagre compensation. It is completely unconscionable of the UPA Government to suggest that all nuclear accidents, which have the potential of being much larger than the Bhopal tragedy, be capped at a figure that has already been shown to be a gross underestimate. Apart from this, the minuscule liability of Rs. 500 crore for the Indian operator - currently the state owned Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited - is tantamount to encouraging the operator to play with plant safety.

The suppliers' liability has also been made virtually non-existent in the proposed Bill. Normally, if any accident takes place in a nuclear plant, the victims and the Indian operator should be able to sue the supplier for damages if the cause of the accident is found to be poor or faulty equipment. The Bill takes away this legal right of the Indian operator as well as the victims. Instead of ensuring the operators' and victims' right to claim damages from the supplier, the current Bill limits this to only a private contract between the supplier and the operator. The US suppliers can make billions of dollars from the Indian market, but will not have to pay any damages for a nuclear accident. Even if they are completely at fault.

Favouring US Suppliers

It is important to note that neither the Russian nor the French nuclear equipment suppliers have raised the issue of capping or limiting nuclear liability. It is an entirely US concern and being driven by the interests of US suppliers and investors. If this is accepted, this will be yet another case of the Central Government capitulating to the US and putting the interest of US capital before the interests of its people.

The Central Government has already proposed to buy 10,000 MW of nuclear reactors from private US suppliers like GE, Westinghouse and others without going through open tendering and competitive bidding mandated under the present Electricity Act. This is being done as Government to Government contracts, precluding public scrutiny of the terms of these contracts. The Government is also unwilling to tell the people either the cost of those reactors or the cost of electricity which is to be produced from such imported reactors. The latest figures available from the US regulator makes clear that the cost of US made reactors will be 3 to 4 times that of indigenous reactors and so also the electricity produced from such plants.

Moreover, even such high price for their reactors and billions of dollars of profits is not enough for the US nuclear suppliers. They also seek to completely cover their risks at the cost of the Indian exchequer. Omer F Brown, the key spokesperson for the US nuclear industry and the lead counsel to two major nuclear industry groups - the Contractors International Group on Nuclear Liability and the Energy Contractors Price-Anderson Group - articulated the US position on the need for nuclear liability law in India while speaking at a business summit in Mumbai in December 2006:

Currently, India does not have a nuclear liability law covering its facilities. Therefore, concerns over nuclear liability would be a major impediment to any nuclear trade with India...Most US nuclear suppliers would not be willing to work in India without nuclear liability protection.

US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Robert Blake informed House Foreign Affairs Committee last year, "We are hoping to see action on nuclear liability legislation that would reduce liability for American companies and allow them to invest in India.". Recently, he said in an interview (10th March 2010):

We also are very much hoping that the Indian government will proceed with very important legislation on nuclear liability, that will be very important protection for American companies who are seeking to do more business in the civil nuclear area, in India. And, we were very gratified to learn that the President of India has announced India's intention to introduce this bill in the current session of the Indian Parliament.

This is the background to the proposed legislation.

Against Indian Jurisprudence

The current liability regime in India is quite clear: for hazardous industries, the plant owners have strict liability for accidents and the law does not accept any limits to liability. The party concerned must not only pay full compensation to affected persons but also bear the cost of environmental damage that any accident may cause. The Oleum leak from Sriram Food and Fertilizers settled the liability regime in India. The Supreme Court judgement in this case - MC Mehta vs. Union of India (1987) - stated clearly:

.in case of accidents occurring in plants run by enterprises which are engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity that poses a potential threat to the health and safety of persons such enterprises applying the Polluter Pays Principle owe an absolute and non-delegable duty to ensure that no harm results to anyone. (emphasis added)

Any legislation seeking to cap liability as is being proposed will therefore be completely retrogressive.

International Liability Regimes

The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill states that the Bill is meant to facilitate India's entry into an international nuclear liability regime. It explicitly states that India intends to join the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage, which was adopted in 1997. This it is argued would provide India access to an international fund to compensate victims of nuclear accidents, for which India too has to make its own contribution.

What is not mentioned, however, is that only thirteen countries have signed this Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC): Argentina, Australia, Czech Republic, Indonesia, Italy, Lebanon, Lithuania, Morocco, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Ukraine and the US. Out of these thirteen countries, only four including the US, Argentina, Morocco and Romania have ratified it so far. Hence the Convention has not yet entered into force since it requires the ratification of at least five States with a minimum of 400,000 MW of installed nuclear capacity. In contrast to the existing Paris or Vienna Conventions, the CSC provides complete protection to the suppliers of nuclear equipment. This is the reason why important countries such as Russia have not signed the CSC; which has been a bone of contention between the US and Russia. Most other countries operating significant number of nuclear plants have also not joined the CSC. Therefore neither is there any reason why India should hurry to join this Convention, nor any basis to the claim that joining this Convention would immediately provide access to international funds, since the CSC is yet to enter into force.

The Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage under the auspices of the IAEA attempts to put together a common minimum liability regime for countries operating nuclear plants. India is so far not a party to this Convention. It is noteworthy that the Vienna Convention does not cap nuclear liability but only puts a minimum floor. It also allows countries to operate their independent liability regimes. For example, Germany, Japan and Finland all have unlimited liability, the same as current Indian law.

The US, which is not a part of the Vienna Convention or the Paris Convention (but a signatory to the CSC) has its own Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act 1957 (last amended in 2005) governing its domestic nuclear damage liability. The Price-Anderson Act ensures the availability of private-sector funds of over $ 10 billion (over Rs. 45000 crore) to cover liability for nuclear damages. Thus the liability of the US nuclear operators for nuclear damages is 23 times more in the US than what is being proposed in the Indian legislation. Are Indian lives 23 times cheaper than American lives?

Not in the Interest of Indian People

The nuclear liability regime being proposed through the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill is nothing but a huge hidden subsidy to the US equipment suppliers. It appears that in order to promote private nuclear power plants and favour US equipment suppliers, the UPA Government is willing to sacrifice the interests of the Indian people.

We appeal to you to consider all these aspects of the Bill carefully. We hope you will take a stand against this Bill which compromises the vital interests of the Indian people regarding their safety and security.

(Prakash Karat) (A. B. Bardhan)

General Secretary, CPI (M) General Secretary, CPI

(Debabrata Biswas) (T. J. Chandrachoodan)

General Secretary, AIFB General Secretary, RSP

_______________________________________________
Marxistindia mailing list
Marxistindia@cpim.org
http://cpim.org/mailman/listinfo/marxistindia_cpim.org
http://wwww.cpim.org

[Marxistindia] Jail Bharo -- April 8

marxistindia
news from the cpi(m)
March 12, 2010

Press Release

Left Parties Call: 8th April – Jail Bharo

Over one lakh people participated in the March to Parliament and the Left
Parties rally on March 12 against price rice, for land rights, employment
and against the violence on the Left in West Bengal.

At the conclusion of the rally, the Left parties announced that on 8th
April, in all districts headquarters there will be mass picketing and
court arrest programmes outside Central Government offices. 25 lakh people
will participate in this programme to demand immediate steps to curb price
rise and for strengthening the public distribution system, implementation
of land reforms and employment opportunities.

The rally was addressed by Prakash Karat, A.B. Bardhan, Debabrata Biswas
and T J Chandrachoodan – General Secretaries of the CPI(M), CPI, AIFB and
RSP. The other speakers were Biman Bose, Chairman of the West Bengal Left
Front, Sitaram Yechury and Gurudas Dasgupta.

_______________________________________________
Marxistindia mailing list
Marxistindia@cpim.org
http://cpim.org/mailman/listinfo/marxistindia_cpim.org
http://wwww.cpim.org

[Marxistindia] callous justification of petro price hike

marxistindia
news from the cpi(m)
March 03, 2010
Press Statement

The Polit Bureau of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) has issued the
following statement:

Callous Justification of Petro Price Hike

The Prime Minister's justification of the hike in indirect taxes on diesel
and petrol in the Union Budget in terms of taking a "long-term view"
reflects a flawed economic thinking and insensitivity to the sufferings of
the people due to price rise.

Estimates suggest that the Government seeks to mobilise between Rs. 25000
to 30000 crore in the forthcoming year through the increase in customs and
excise duties on diesel and petrol. On the other hand, the Finance
Minister himself announced in his Budget speech that Rs. 26000 crore worth
of revenue will be lost during the same period due to the cut in income
taxes. How come the Prime Minister is defending the indirect tax hike in
the name of fiscal consolidation while turning a blind eye towards the
direct tax cuts?

What comprises "populist policies"? Having low indirect taxes on fuel,
which is consumed by an overwhelming majority of the people, or doling out
corporate tax concessions worth Rs. 80000 crore in one single year
(2009-10) in the name of stimulus?

The Prime Minister's assertion that the impact of the fuel price hike will
lead to only 0.4% rise in the wholesale price index is a gross
miscalculation since it does not take into account the impact of high fuel
prices on food prices. Food price inflation soared after the last hike in
petro prices in July 2009. At a time when the people are reeling under
nearly 20% food price inflation, this round of fuel price hike will amount
to a completely back breaking burden.

The CPI (M) rejects the Prime Minister's callous defence of the fuel price
hike and strongly reiterates its demand to withdraw the increase in
customs and excise duties on diesel and petrol immediately.

_______________________________________________
Marxistindia mailing list
Marxistindia@cpim.org
http://cpim.org/mailman/listinfo/marxistindia_cpim.org
http://wwww.cpim.org

[Marxistindia] union budget 2010

marxistindia
news from the cpi(m)
February 26, 2010

Press Statement

Union Budget 2010: Pro-Rich and Anti-People
The Union Budget 2010 presented by the UPA Government will neither
stimulate growth nor bring down inflation. The Budget is premised upon a
flawed strategy to meet the budget deficit by increasing indirect taxes
across the board, especially on diesel and petrol, which will hit the
common people, primarily the poorer sections. In contrast, direct taxes on
the affluent sections have been reduced. This anti-people strategy will
further fuel inflation in the backdrop of an already high food inflation
rate of 20%.
As per the Finance Minister's own estimates, there will be a revenue loss
of Rs. 26000 crore in 2010-11 due to the direct tax concessions doled out
to high-income earners as well as real estate developers, hoteliers and
other commercial establishments. This comes in the backdrop of nearly Rs.
80000 crore tax concessions to corporates in 2009-10. In contrast, the
Finance Minister has proposed to raise an additional Rs. 60000 crore in
indirect taxes over the last year. The most objectionable aspect of the
increase in indirect taxes has come in the form of a 5% increase in
customs duty on crude petroleum along with a Re. 1 per litre increase in
central excise duty on petrol and diesel. Raising the prices of diesel and
petrol will further fuel all round inflation in the economy.
On the expenditure side, while there is a 15% increase in Central Plan
expenditure, the increase in Central Assistance for the States is merely
8%, which implies a squeeze in real terms (the nominal GDP growth rate is
12.2%). The Budget also incorporates the recommendations of the 13th
Finance Commission for only 32% share of the States in sharable central
taxes against the demand to allocate 50%. On elementary education the
paltry increase of Rs. 5000 crore falls far short of the requirement of
universalizing the Right to Education. The Central Plan outlays for
agriculture, irrigation and rural development shows stagnation in real
terms, reflecting the Government's waning commitment towards the rural
population.
It is also shocking that food subsidy has been reduced by over Rs. 400
crore despite the commitment to enact a food security legislation.
Fertiliser subsidy has also been cut by a whopping Rs. 3000 crore from
what was spent last year. These moves to reduce subsidies in the name of
targetting comes at a time when inflation is galloping and agricultural
output growth has become negative. The anti-people approach of the
Government in reducing subsidies was laid bare in the Economic survey,
which has prescribed the dismantling of the PDS and initiating a "coupon
system" for food and fertilisers.
The Finance Minister has announced a Rs. 40000 crore disinvestment
programme for 2010-11, following Rs 25000 crore disinvestment earnings in
2009-10. This has been justified in the Budget speech as "unlocking" the
value of the CPSEs. However, the latest Public Enterprises Survey 2008-09
clearly shows that the market capitalization of all listed CPSEs taken
together fell by 27.41% between 31st March 2008 and 31st March 2009. The
Finance Minister is therefore resorting to a specious defence of
disinvestment, which is solely meant to appease the stock market
speculators. The announcement that the RBI will issue bank licenses to
more private sector players including non-bank finance companies reflect
its intent towards further liberalisation of the financial sector.
The Polit Bureau of the CPI (M) calls for the withdrawal of the indirect
tax proposals which will fuel inflation and adversely affect the people.
The increase in petrol and diesel prices to the tune of over Rs. 2.50 per
litre must be summarily rescinded. The cuts in food and fertiliser subsidy
also need to be reversed. The Polit Bureau calls upon all its Party units
to launch protest actions against the anti-people proposals of the Budget.

_______________________________________________
Marxistindia mailing list
Marxistindia@cpim.org
http://cpim.org/mailman/listinfo/marxistindia_cpim.org
http://wwww.cpim.org

[Marxistindia] rail budget 2010

marxistindia
news from the cpi(m)

February 24, 2010

Press Statement

Railway Budget 2010: Total Gimmickry

The Railway Budget presented in Parliament today exposed a sharp
deterioration in the performance of the Indian Railways. Far from
containing any vision for the future of the Indian Railways, the Budget
speech has sought to conceal gross failures through misleading
announcements and gimmicks aimed at the forthcoming Assembly elections in
West Bengal.

Over 120 railway accidents have taken place so far during this financial
year. In this backdrop it is inexplicable how the allocations for the
Railway Safety Fund has been cut by Rs. 579 crore from last year.
Moreover, the Minister has strangely tried to shift the blame for railway
accidents on to rail rokos and natural disasters! This shows the
Minister's distorted perspective on the crucial aspect of railway safety.

As per the Railway Ministry's own estimates, over 1.7 lakhs Railway posts
were lying vacant in 2009, out of which nearly 90000 were posts related to
railway safety. The Minister has kept completely silent on filling up
these vacancies, which can provide job opportunities to the youth.

The Railway's operating ratio (the ratio of total working expenses to the
earnings – a higher ratio implies deterioration), which was 90.5% in
2008-09 has risen to 94.7% in 2009-10. Such a sharp deterioration in just
one year reflects the gross mismanagement of Railway affairs by the
Minister. Gross Traffic Receipts in 2009-10 have fallen short of the
budgeted estimate by Rs. 63 crore. Moreover, plan investment in Railways
also fell short of the budgeted target of 2009-10 by Rs. 497 crore. This
clearly shows that the Railway Minister has not been able to implement the
tall promises that she made in the last Budget. In this context the
grandiose announcements of projects ranging from hospitals and diagnostic
centres, sports academies and musuems ring a trifle hollow.

By the Railway Minister's own admission, many of her project announcements
were made without the sanction of the Planning Commission. Their
implementation therefore is highly suspect. This is further borne out by
the fact that for 2010-11, plan investment in Railways is budgeted to
increase by only Rs. 1142 crore, which amounts to a drastic fall in plan
investment in real terms. While the Railway Minister has made tall claims
on laying 1000 kms of new railway lines, it is shocking that the actual
plan allocations for gauge conversion, doubling of railway lines and new
rolling stock like wagons and carriages have been cut in nominal terms.
This squeeze in public investment in the Railways is accompanied by an
unprecedented thrust towards privatisation in all areas in the name of
PPP: from modernisation of railway stations; new railway lines; freight
and passenger corridors; locomotive, wagon and container manufacturing;
rail axle factory; parking complexes and bottling plants. This wholesale
privatisation programme for the Railways, opening up the entire sector for
private profiteering, will be inimical to national interest. It appears as
if the entire decision-making in the Railway Ministry has been handed over
to the corporate sector.

The Polit Bureau of the CPI (M) calls upon the people to protest against
these proposals, which are neither in the interest of the Railways nor in
the interests of providing relief and better travel and communication
facilities.

_______________________________________________
Marxistindia mailing list
Marxistindia@cpim.org
http://cpim.org/mailman/listinfo/marxistindia_cpim.org
http://wwww.cpim.org