My father is a retired public sector undertaking employee. Having grown up in a city within a city scenario where this navratna organisation had created all kind of facilities for its employees sector-wise schools, colleges, dispensaries, shopping complexes, recreational facilities, everything the employee and their families would ever need, I have deep respect for public sector organisations. But over the time they haven't been able to sustain themselves. When I finished my graduation the organisation hadn't recruited a single engineer since 4 years, the employee quarters were slowly being sold-given on rent to outsiders, many education society schools were closed and a lot of checks were put on providing medical facilities especially to the retired ones. Obviously it hurts, but it also underlined the compulsions of such a public sector organisation. In this case this was a profit making enterprise but most of the otters aren't.
Which brings me to the core issue, the discussion started on scrapping of the Disinvestment ministry prorogated by the Left as it prepares to back a Congress lead government at the center. The leftist thinking obviously has roots in safeguarding worker rights. They maintain that disinvestments need a human face, don't sell the "family jewels", don't disinvest the navratnas, the profit making non-navratnas they say. This has caused much furore. The Samajwadi party terming Shourie as "a economic terrorist" says, "Sell only those that are not making profits". If you look at the primary reasons for disinvestment, they were manifold:
- Removing government monopoly and allow private sector players to participate so that better competition leads to better services/competitive prices
- Get rid of loss making organisations, organisations with surplus manpower, high overheads.
- Redeployment of resources in areas that are much higher on the social priority, such as, basic health, family welfare, primary education and social and essential infrastructure
While I fail to understand how the disinvestment decision on the two petroleum giants, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL) and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) would have justified on the point (2), since they have consistently contributed to the Central exchequer, the last point is the one that interests me. Government should not certainly be burdened with running companies, but if it has to, as in matters of National security and safeguard (Atomic energy, railways for instance) and for social concerns, it should perhaps limit itself to the sectors mentioned at (3).
The disinvestment issue indeed is touchy and in all ways non-populist . Now there are umpteen ways to populism but they can cause serious repercussions too. Remember that Digvijay Singh lost in last assembly elections mainly because he refused to pay perks to government employees, who comprise of 1% of MP voters, and cut down posts as he had to cut the cost to the exchequer on salaries in order to satisfy the rest of 99% in form of subsidies (for example: in form of "free" electricity). Today many such governments will be shocked to discover, when they actually hold the steering, that infact there is no money in their wallet to entertain such populist measures. When people tend to feel that employment is being cut (it doesn't matter if in organisation alike the National Textiles people are drawing salaries sitting at home, rationale being where else can they go) they will protest. Third parties can always smell foul and say the the companies were under-sold or there was something fishy in the deals. We must remember that perhaps this was the reason that Arun Shourie was given the charge for the ministry, for his non-partisan, steady image. Thanks to the forward looking attitude of many such public sector employees like my father, atleast people like me are not sitting at home waiting for the trade unions to fetch us a secure sarkari job. These are not the days to leech to government run enterprises for nourishment simply because you voted for the government.
Congress has been the pioneer in playing populism cards (ranging from Castes to Ayodhya) but if they try playing with seemingly sane economy measures, just to appease the allies, they might just pay the price as well. The way of economy, India has started traveling on, I think no party ever can stop the pace. It's just a matter of public image, behind the scenes they will have to do what all others have been doing, whosoever comes to power. My advise to these politicians is: pick some other card to play.