Sitaram Yechury, General Secretary of the CPI(M), has exposed the truth about deMonetisatiob. In a press conference, he has pithily outlined the hardships caused to ordinary Indians,  both in the short and the long term.

According to  RBI data, 99% of the notes, that were demonetised last November, have been returned to the banks. All the black money that the government stated would be removed from the system, has found its way back in and has ended up being legitimised. 

The move ended up costing more than a hundred lives, as they stood in queues waiting to withdraw their own money. It effectively killed the informal sector costing scores of the poorest people their jobs and did not come close to curbing any terrorist activities. Then what was the purpose of this move after all?

Twelve  questions Yechury has put to the Modi regime, demanding answers:

1. Who decided to demonetise? (Was it the PM?) Is that the reason why Raghuram Rajan was forced to go?
2. More than 100 people died in queues, trying to get their own, hard-earned money due to PM’s announcement. Who is responsible? Why no compensation? Is there an FIR?
3. Reportedly, more than 100% of demonetised currency is coming back after Bhutanese, Nepalese and Coop Banks Currency is taken in. This shows it’s a successful Money Laundering scheme.
4. In Bengal and elsewhere too, BJP members were known to have made bulk deposits of massive amounts just before Demonetisation was announced. So it was the biggest scam of Independent India. So much for PM’s fight against corruption.
5. There was no mention of digitisation on Nov 8, but the the Economy crashed, the government went out of the way to help certain selected private companies under the mask of ‘digitisation.’ PM himself featured in full-page ads of a private company (Paytm). Why? Clearly to give a profit bonanza to international and domestic players.
6. Was this entire exercise done to protect the corporates who are refusing to return the loans they had taken from our nationalised banks which according to one estimate is around Rs. 11,00,000 crores, including interest? Was this done to prevent the banks from collapsing as a consequence of these loans? The government instead should have taken measures to recover these loans which is people’s money.
7. Corruption has far from ended. The amount of money in 2000 rupee notes is much more than the amount of money in 1000 rupee notes. Is that what the PM wanted? To help the corrupt rich?
8. PM’s claims on Counterfeit currency are wrong. This scheme has legitimised all counterfeit currency.
9. There were claims that this was to finish Terror. Far from it, numbers of security personnel lost to terror has gone up significantly since.
10. The Informal sector has collapsed. All data shows that this sector which employs more than two-thirds of our workforce has collapsed due to demonetisation. Lives, Livelihoods and Jobs have been decimated. This government is responsible for this.
11. Ill-Effects of demonetisation on rural markets and Agriculture, heightened the distress among farmers. Their protests have been met by police firing from BJP state governments.
12. Why were people imposed with a burden of printing new notes costing Rs. 8000 crores; ATM recalibration cost of over Rs. 35,000 crores in addition to the loss of economic activity estimated by the CMIE and others to the tune of Rs. 1,50,000 crores?
13. How much taxpayer money in ads has the centre spent to ‘ glorify’ the PM and Demonetisation?
14. The government must fix accountability for this disaster and punish those responsible.
 

The post Twelve Posers on Demonetization: Sitaram Yechury appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The BJP government, under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has unveiled the true character of the BJP functioning as the political arm of the RSS.  The RSS continues to pursue its ideological project of converting the secular democratic Republic into their version of a rabidly intolerant fascistic `Hindu Rashtra’.

In the process, the government has unleashed a quadruple attack on India and the people.  At one level, there is a sharp rise of communal polarisation with growing murderous attacks on dalits and the Muslim minority community; secondly, neo-liberal economic reforms are being pursued more aggressively by this government than ever before; thirdly, growing authoritarian trends are undermining the democratic and parliamentary institutions; and lastly, India has been reduced to the status of a junior strategic partner of US imperialism. 

DETERIORATING PEOPLE’S LIVELIHOOD CONDITIONS
This BJP government assumed office promising acche din for the people. It had promised to create two crores of jobs every year.  As against this, the job creation in eight major industrial sectors in the country was lowest in the last eight years.  1.35 lakh jobs were created in these sectors in 2015. In 2016, the Labour Bureau reports that 2.31 lakh jobs were created.  Over and above the backlog of huge unemployment in the country, 1.5 crore youth join the job market every year.   Even amongst those who are working, the ILO reports that 35 per cent of India’s working people are `under employed’. 

The much tom-tomed IT sector has reported a dismal picture regarding job creation.  International agency, McKinsey has estimated that amongst the 40 lakh workers in the IT sector today, nearly 50 to 60 per cent would be rendered redundant.  Three major IT companies – Infosys, Wipro and Cognizant – have reported considering retrenching 56,000 workers.  The IITs, across the country, have reported a sharp fall in corporates hiring students passing out from the campuses. 

Rural employment has been severely curtailed with the refusal of this BJP government to release funds for the legal commitments made under the MGNREGA. The government, on an average, has reportedly informed that during the course of these three years, more than 20,000 people under this scheme were denied payment of wages each year.  Take the case of Tripura, a state which ranks number one in providing the maximum mandays under this scheme, averaging around 94, the funds released by the central government are so meagre that Tripura can now only offer 42 mandays, ie, less than half of what was there during the past three years.

The scenario for the future looks bleak on both the employment as well as industrial/manufacturing front. The growth rate of industrial output has dropped from 5.5 per cent to 2.7 per cent last year.  Credit growth from the banking sector has dipped to its lowest level in 63 years.  Clearly, manufacturing activity has declined considerably reflected in this fall of banking credit growth. 

The demonetisation had crippled the informal sector of our economy which contributes to over 40 per cent of our GDP and accounts for nearly three-fourths of our employment. 

The conditions in rural India have worsened during these last three years.  The central government has informed the apex court that, on an average, 12,000 farmers have been committing distress suicides in every one of these three years.  The major reason for these distress suicides is the debt burden under which the majority of the Indian farmers are groaning. Three years ago, this BJP government promised to increase the minimum support price for our farmers to the level of one and a half times the input costs required for agricultural operations.  The government has betrayed the peasantry on this account as well. 

On top of this, the import duty on wheat has been eliminated resulting in wheat coming into the market at a price lower than the MSP declared by the government.  The farmers are being forced to undertake distress sales which further worsen the debt burden.  Even the existing MSP is not being paid to the farmers for many crops, including cotton. This is the state of our annadatas during the course of these three years.

While this government is considering proposals for restructuring (read `writing off’) the massive loans taken by Indian corporates from our nationalised banks, it is not prepared to consider the restructuring of loans taken by our farmers.  The outstanding NPAs against corporates, including interest, would amount to a humongous Rs 11 lakh crores.  While the poor farmers are harassed with the properties and cattle being attached by the bank, pushing them towards distress suicides, no punitive action against any defaulting corporates is even being considered.  This is the true character of this government that has been exposed during the course of these three years. 

GROWING INEQUALITIES
Naturally, under these conditions, the Human Development Indicators for the vast majority of the Indian people has sharply declined.  The reputed international medical journal, The Lancet, has shown that India ranks at a low position of 154 out of 195 countries on the global index of `burden of disease’.  India has fallen eleven places on this index during the last one year.  Indian people today face a `burden of disease’ which is worse than our sub-continent neighbours like Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh. 

Such anti-people policies of enriching the rich and impoverishing the poor have resulted in a huge growth of economic inequalities. Between 2014 and 2016, the richest one per cent of Indians increased their share of nation’s wealth from 49 per cent to 58.4 per cent. This figure stood at 36.8 per cent in 2000. The same Credit Suisse report that gives this information also shows a more alarming feature that the share of the bottom 70 per cent of Indians together is today just 7 per cent of the nation’s wealth. This figure was double at 14 per cent that this 70 per cent owned in 2010.

The latest National Sample Survey report on household expenditure in India shows the huge gulf between the rich and poor that is widening in a rapid manner. The top 10 per cent of Indian households today have an average asset holding of Rs 1.5 crore. This is 50,034 times the average value of assets held by an urban household of the bottom 10 per cent of our country.

The expenditures of India’s poor are so meagre that this does not figure in any compilation of statistics of macro entities of GDP or tax collections. In fact the lower half of India’s population spends virtually nothing on any item other than what is required for their survival. Given these disparities the devastation that the demonetisation has struck on India’s poor had made little difference to the overall spending patterns in the country because it is only the rich and to a certain extent the upper section of the middle class that spends. This explains why the figures for the GDP or that for the tax collections or for that matter the sensex do not show a decline following demonetisation. In other words, it is not that demonetisation was not inconsequential to people’s livelihood, it devastated India’s other half while statistically this does not get reflected.

SHARPENING COMMUNAL POLARISATION
In almost all BJP ruled states, private armies in the name of cow protection have surfaced that are mounting murderous attacks on dalits and minorities.  Squads for `moral policing’ like the anti-Romeo squad in Uttar Pradesh or Sri Ram Sena in Karnataka continuously harass our youth prescribing what to wear, what to eat, whom to  befriend etc. Unless such private armies are banned, the protection of the rights of the dalits and minorities cannot be ensured.
The situation in the state of Jammu & Kashmir continues to worsen.  This BJP government’s Kashmir policy has proved to be a complete failure.  The government has reneged on its promises of implementing some confidence building measures in Jammu & Kashmir and starting the political process of a dialogue with all stakeholders in the state.

There is a systematic and intensive effort to change the country’s education policy. Syllabus to be taught in schools and colleges is being rapidly communalised.  To control the institutions of research and higher education, central universities like JNU and HCU are under attack to destroy the progressive and secular content of these institutions.

All these put together amount to the advancing of the RSS agenda to convert the secular democratic Republic into their version of a rabidly intolerant fascistic `Hindu Rashtra’.

UNDERMINING INSTITUTIONS
Parliamentary institutions are being undermined.  This government is taking frequent recourse of declaring various legislations as `money bills’ in order to avoid the Rajya Sabha where it does not have a majority.  Most of the legislative business is passed without discussions in the Lok Sabha where the BJP exercises its tyranny of majority.

Recently, the laws governing the donations made to political parties by the corporates have been amended in such a manner that they will now legalise political corruption.  The existing limits on the amounts the corporates can donate to political parties have been removed.  The transparency of such donations are also being adversely affected with the introduction of electoral bonds. It is no longer necessary to know who has bought the electoral bonds and given it to which political parties.  Thus, there is no transparency any longer for political funding and, therefore, no accountability.  This government refuses to amend the existing laws to impose a ceiling on the expenditures of political parties during elections, nor, ban corporate funding of political parties.  Consequently, the role of money power distorting the democratic choices of the people has sharply increased.

India has now opened up almost all areas of its economy for the in-flow of foreign funds. This includes crucial sensitive sectors like defence production.  This largely facilitates the profit maximisation of multinational corporations at the expense of the Indian economy and the people.  A massive drive of privatisation of the public sector has been launched.

With the signing of Indo-US treaties, India has entered into a logistics sharing arrangement with the USA and has been accorded the status of a `US defence partner’.  This is not in the interests of India’s independent foreign policy status and position in the world. 

These three years, hence, have seen an all-round attack on the vast majority of the Indian people.  The people’s discontent is being sought to be diverted away from protests against the BJP government and its policies through the rousing of jingoistic nationalism of the Hindutva variety.  All patriotic Indian people have to uphold the banner of Indian patriotism as opposed to the whipping up of Hindutva nationalism.  These three years have shown that it is only the power of popular united struggles that can put the pressure on this government to change its policy direction in favour of improving people’s livelihood and to safeguard the republican character of our country. 

The post Growing Inequalities, Communal Polarisation & Undermising Institutions Mark 3 Years of the Modi Sarkar appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The BJP has scored a stunning victory in the recent round of assembly elections. In Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, it has managed to maintain its 2014 performance. In the 2014 general elections, it had polled 42.3 per cent of the vote in Uttar Pradesh and 55.3 per cent in Uttarakhand.  In these assembly elections, it polled 39.7 per cent in UP and 46.5 per cent in Uttarakhand.  The BJP, however, faced a miserable defeat in Punjab where the Congress party succeeded in dislodging the Akali Dal-BJP alliance government by a big margin.  Though the Congress party emerged as a single largest party in Goa and Manipur, but falling short of a majority, the BJP managed to form the governments in these two states.  The BJP employed a lethal cocktail of intimidation, appeasement through corruption and lure of cabinet rank positions and immense money power with devastating effect, to shore up a majority negating the people's verdict in these states.

The BJP's claims that this victory is an endorsement of demonetization and its record of good governance are completely untenable given its performance in Punjab, Goa and Manipur.  Its victories in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand are due to many factors, mainly, an effective combination of communal polarization and caste-based social engineering.
 
The BJP today does not have a single MP in the Lok Sabha who is a Muslim.  In Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, the BJP did not field a single Muslim candidate.  The underlying message is clear:  a message that it conveyed in 2014 through its campaign on the so-called successful "Gujarat model".  Notwithstanding the dubious claims of this model, most of the claims have been shown to be patently false, the diabolic message conveyed was that the successes in Gujarat were due to sanitising the state of the Muslims, following the 2002 communal genocide – an   insidious propaganda technique for sharpening communal polarization.

With PM Modi's barbed references to khabaristan and shamshanghat, Eid and Diwali, this sinister communal campaign was unleashed.  The BJP President added on to this by clubbing the Congress-Samajwadi Party and the BSP as champions of Muslim appeasement through the coinage of a new vocabulary – kasab.  This immediately projected the BJP's principal opposition parties as those having strong links with cross border terrorism sponsored by Pakistan.  In contrast, the BJP tom-tomed its anti-Pakistan, hence anti-Muslim, credentials by claiming the successes of its `surgical strikes'.  (Such claims have been shown to be false by the fact that double the number of our brave jawans lost their lives due to terrorist attacks in the three months after `surgical strikes' than in the three months prior.)

Such a communal campaign works effectively only in states that have a sizable Muslim population. This explains why it could not work such magic in the other three states.  The RSS rumour mill churned out the chant of `a Muslim government is coming' to rally the people against the secular parties in Uttar Pradesh.

Both the SP-Congress and the BSP formations fell into the trap of this narrative, rather than providing a counter narrative. The BSP supremo continuously reminded the people that they had fielded a hundred Muslim candidates and appealed to the minority community to not vote for the SP-Congress combine as her pro-Muslim credentials were more `credible'.

Simultaneously, the BJP's electoral strategy perfected a social engineering of seeking to mobilize the non-Yadav OBCs and the non-Jatav SCs, against the predominantly Yadav-oriented SP and the BSP whose major support base is among the Jatavs.

The lack of a counter narrative by the secular opposition formation added to the BJP's successes.  It is now being argued by a large section that a `mahajot' in Uttar Pradesh like the one that emerged in the Bihar assembly elections would have surely halted the BJP.  They go on to demonstrate that if the votes polled by the candidates of the SP, Congress, BSP and RLD are pooled together, then this `mahajot' would have won 313 assembly seats leaving only 90 for the BJP.

Unfortunately, politics is not arithmetic.  An alternative to the BJP's communal project can only emerge through a counter narrative opposed to that projected by the BJP and PM Modi.  The probabilities for mounting such a pro-people alternative narrative existed, particularly in the aftermath of demonetization that imposed unprecedented economic miseries on the vast sections of the poor and the marginalized.  As it is obvious by now, the demonetization completely shattered  the informal economy which contributes over 40 per cent of our country's GDP and generates over 80 per cent of our jobs.  Rural life in Uttar Pradesh was and continues to be in shambles.  Kisans were selling their produce in distress due to lack of currency notes at prices less than half of the government announced minimum support price.  Instead of reaching out to these sections and drawing them into popular mobilizations against the BJP economic policies and the PM's demonetization, both the SP-Congress and the BSP fell into the trap of the BJP's narrative.  This further facilitated the BJP campaign that demonetization was anti-rich and pro-poor!  The opposite is the reality.  This attitude of these parties was clear even earlier during the winter session of the Parliament.  Sixteen opposition parties in Parliament have come together to oppose this demonetization. At the insistence of the Left parties, a joint call was given for nation-wide hartal on November 28, 2016.  The major secular opposition parties, at best, paid lip service to this call but refused to actively mobilize the people's discontent. This failure resulted in the BJP's narrative becoming the dominant narrative.  The bourgeois opposition parties fell into the trap of this narrative and became pre-occupied with seeking to mobilize identity and caste based sections of people for electoral support.

Ably aided by the BJP drum-beaters in the bourgeois media and an unprecedented display of money power, the BJP narrative was the only narrative before the people.  It was the Left parties alone who were seeking to establish the alternative narrative.  However, unlike in Kerala and  other states where the Left has a strong political presence, in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, the BJP gained in the absence of an effective alternate narrative.

These elections also thoroughly exposed the BJP's so-called concern to combat political corruption by parties during elections.  The display of money power by the BJP was, indeed, unprecedented.  This has reportedly played a major role in the BJP cobbling up a majority in Goa and Manipur despite not emerging as the single largest party there.

The urgency to initiate deep-rooted electoral reforms to curb the use of money power has assumed an immediacy.  The strength of the counter narrative to the BJP and PM Modi's narrative is the most reliable foundation for uniting the Left and democratic forces in our country to stand as a bulwark against the sharpened communal offensive being unleashed by the BJP and to safeguard the secular democratic foundations of the Indian Republic.

In the final analysis, it is only through the strength of the popular people's struggles that this communal monster can be defeated.
 

The post BJP’s Lethal Cocktail of Communal Polarisation and Caste Based Social Engineering appeared first on SabrangIndia.

येचुरी ने जेटली के दावे का कड़ा विरोध किया। दोनों मुद्दों पर माकपा के महासचिव ने सरकार को माकूल जवाब दिए।

लोन राइट ऑफ्स यानी कर्जों को बट्टे खाते में डालने के सवाल पर येचुरी का बयान
 
16 नवंबर को राज्यसभा में नोटबंदी के सवाल पर अपनी स्पीच के दौरान मैंने वित्त वर्ष 2014-15 और वित्त वर्ष 2015-16 के दौरान बैंकों के 1,12,078 करोड़ रुपये के उन कर्जों का मुद्दा उठाया था, जिन्हें चुकाया नहीं गया है। लेकिन वित्त मंत्री जी मानते हैं ये ‘राइट ऑफ्स’ सिर्फ अकाउंटिंग एंट्री हैं।

वित्त मंत्री ने यह भी कहा कि ये फंसे हुए कर्ज बैंक खातों से उठा लिए गए हैं। फिर भी सरकार इन कर्जों की वसूली की पूरी कोशिश करेगी। जेटली जी का यह बयान वास्तविक स्थिति की अधूरी ( असलियत से परे) तस्वीर पेश करता है।
 
खाते से उठने या टेकन ऑफ द बुक्स का मतलब?
 
खाते से उठने का मतलब यह है कि बैंक अब इन कर्जों की रिकवरी की कोशिश नहीं करेंगे और अब यह इनकी बैंलेस-शीट को भी प्रभावित नहीं करेगा। मंत्री ने यह भी कहा कि राइट ऑफ्स का मतलब लोन परफॉर्मिंग एसेट से नॉन परफॉर्मिंग एसेट में बदल गया है। यह गलत है क्योंकि यह वह नॉन परफॉर्मिंग एसेट यानी फंसे हुए कर्ज हैं, जिन्हें बट्टे खाते में डाल दिया गया है। परफॉर्मिंग एसेट को नॉन परफॉर्मिंग एसेट को बदलने के नियमों को आरबीआई ने एक मास्टर सर्कुलर में साफ-साफ बताया है ( खास कर मास्टर सर्कुलर के 3.5, 5.9 और 5.10 सेक्शन में। सर्कुलर का शीर्षक है- प्रुडेंशियल नॉर्म्स ऑन इनकम रेगुलेशन, असेट क्लासिफिकेशन एंड प्रॉविजनिंग –परटेनिंग टु एडवांसेज)
 
सरकार चाहे तो तथ्यों को इन संदर्भ में जांच सकती है-
 
बहरहाल ,राइट ऑफ्स के सवाल पर फिर आते हुए मैं आपको ध्यान दिलाना चाहता हूं इंडियन एक्सप्रेस को लिखे एक पत्र में आरबीआई ने खुद स्पष्ट किया, कुल राइट ऑफ्स (मैं दोहराता हूं) में सिर्फ तकनीकी तौर पर राइट ऑफ्स किए गए अकाउंट का बड़ा हिस्सा है, जिसमें रिकवरी की कोशिश जारी है। लेकिन जैसा कि आरबीआई के डिप्टी गवर्नर के सी चक्रवर्ती ने लिखा है, टेक्निकल राइट ऑफ में जब फंसा हुआ कर्ज (बैड लोन) खातों में नहीं रह जाता है तो रिकवरी की कोशिश का भी कोई मतलब नहीं रह जाता।

सरकार राइट ऑफ्स लोन की रिकवरी के बड़े-बड़े दावे कर रही है। लेकिन आंकड़े पूरी असलियत बता रहे हैं। वित्त वर्ष 2014-15  के दौरान यानी मोदी सरकार के कार्यकाल में जानबूझ कर कर्ज अदा न करने वाले यानी विलफुल डिफॉल्टरों के खिलाफ मुकदमों की दर 1.14 फीसदी है। यह वित्त वर्ष 2014-15 के दौरान की 1.45 की दर से भी कम है।

क्या वित्त मंत्री तथ्यों की जांच कर देश को यह बताएंगे कि सरकार ने कितने राइट ऑफ्स किए गए कर्जों की वसूली की है। अगर नहीं तो यह समझ लेना चाहिए कि राइट ऑफ्स लोन्स सिर्फ तकनीकी मामला नहीं है। यह आम जनता का वह पैसा है, जो सरकार अपने नजदीकी कॉरपोरेट घरानों को देकर बट्टे खाते में डाल रही है।

अगर सरकार सचमुच इस कर्ज की रिकवरी के प्रति गंभीर है तो फिर ऐसे कॉरपोरेट घरानों की संपत्तियों की बिक्री कर पैसे को लोगों के सार्वजनिक बैंकों में मौजूद उन लोगों के खाते में क्यों नहीं डाल रही है जहां से ये कर्ज दिए गए थे।
 
एफसीआरए के मुद्दे पर
 
नोटबंदी के मुद्दे पर मेरी स्पीच के दौरान वित्त मंत्री ने यह बताने के लिए हस्तेक्षप किया कि फॉरेन कंट्रीब्यूशन रेगुलेशन एक्ट (एफसीआरए), 2010 सिर्फ तकनीकी मुद्दा है और राजनीतिक पार्टियों की फंडिंग पर इसका कोई असर नहीं पड़ा है। एक बार फिर सरकार तथ्यों को तोड़-मरोड़ रही है।

 एफसीआरए बिल में पिछली तारीख से संशोधन किया गया है। मोदी सरकार 2016 के फाइनेंस बिल के जरिये फरवरी, 2016 में इसमें एक संशोधन ले आई ताकि विदेशी अनुदान से आने वाले पैसों की जांच से बचा जा सके। इसने पिछली तारीखों के प्रभाव का प्रावधान जोड़ कर एफसीआरए 2010 की धारा 2 (1) (आई) (छह) में संशोधन कर दिया।

जन-प्रतिनिधित्व कानून राजनीतिक दलों को विदेशी फंड लेने से रोकता है। लेकिन इस संशोधन के बाद पार्टियां विदेशी दानदाताओं से फंड हासिल कर सकती और यह सरकार की जांच के दायरे में नहीं आएगी।

एफसीआरए में पिछली तारीख से संशोधन इसलिए किया गया क्योंकि सत्तारूढ़ बीजेपी पर अपनी राजनीतिक गतिविधियों के लिए ब्रिटेन स्थित वेदांता ग्रुप से 2004 से 2012 के बीच फंड लेने का आरोप है। एफसीआरए कानून के इस उल्लंघन का मुकदमा अब भी सुप्रीम कोर्ट में चल रहा है।

इस संशोधन के जरिये एक विदेशी कंपनी (यह अक्सर बड़ी बहुराष्ट्रीय कंपनियों की इकाई होती है) अपनी भारतीय शाखा या इकाई के जरिये ( इसमें 50 फीसदी से ज्यादा भारतीय हिस्सेदारी हो सकती है) भारतीय राजनीतिक पार्टियों को फंड दे सकती है। इस तरह विदेशी कंपनियां सीधे तौर पर भारतीय राजनीतिक दलों को अपनी इकाइयों की जरिये फंड दे सकती हैं। सरकार ने इस कदम से भारतीय राजनीतिक दलों के लिए विदेशी फंडिंग से जुड़े प्रावधानों को इस तरह तोड़ा-मरोड़ा है कि जन प्रतिनिधित्व कानून के बारे में गंभीर चिंता पैदा हो गई है।

The post लोन राइट ऑफ्स और एफसीआरए पर देश को गुमराह कर रही है सरकार – सीताराम येचुरी appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Sitaram Yechury has strongly rebutted the misleading claims made by Finance Minister on both issues:

On Loan Write Offs
During my speech on the demonetisation issue in the Rajya Sabha on November 16, when I raised the issue of Rs 1,12,078 crore of unpaid loans being written off in FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, the finance minister intervened to say that these "write offs" are merely an accounting entry.
 
He went on to add that this means that the bad loan is taken off the books of a bank, but
the banks will still attempt recovery of this money. This gives an incomplete (and inaccurate) picture of the real situation.

What does taken off the books mean?
It means that the banks do not attempt to recover this because it does not affect their balance sheets any longer.

The minister also added that a ‘write-off’ means that the loan, becomes, from a performing asset, a non performing asset. This is incorrect as it is the non-performing asset which is written off.
 
The rules for conversion of a performing asset to a non-performing asset are clearly stated by the RBI in its master circular (particularly, sections 3.5, 5.9 and 5.10 of Master
Circular on "Prudential Norms on Income Recognition, Asset Classification
and Provisioning – Pertaining to Advances").
 
The minister may like to check his facts on this count.

Getting back to the issue of write off, in a letter to The Indian Express newspaper, the RBI itself had clarified that the total write-offs includes – I repeat, only includes — a large portion of technically written-off accounts where the recovery efforts continue as usual. But as the RBI's former deputy governor KC Chakrabarty has noted, after a technical write-off, when the bad loan is no longer on the books, there is no incentive for banks to pursue recovery.

As far as tall claims of this government for recoveries of written off loans go, the facts speak for themselves. The conviction rate of wilful defaulters under this government was 1.14% in 2015-16, even lower than 1.45% in 2014-15. So much for the finance minister's talk of written-off loans being recovered from willful defaulters by his (the Modi) government.

The finance minister may like to check his facts and tell the country how much of the "written off" loans has his government recovered. If not, written off loans are not just technical, it is real money of the people being given by the government to crony corporate and the being written off.

If the government is really serious in recovering these loans why are they not confiscating the properties and returning these loans that are people's savings to the nationalized banks from which they were taken?

On FCRA
During my speech on demonetisation, the Finance Minister intervened to explain the amended Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), 2010 as a mere "technicality", and not having any effect on the funding of political parties. This is yet again, a sleight of hand.

The FCRA was amended with retrospective effect not by introducing and debating a bill in parliament. The govt, instead, brought an amendment to FCRA in February 2016 through the 2016 Finance Bill to avoid scrutiny. It amended Section 2(1) (j) (vi) of FCRA, 2010, by adding a proviso with retrospective effect. The Representation of People's Act bars political parties from receiving foreign funds, but after this amendment, they can receive funding from foreign donors which will bypass government scrutiny.

The amendment was brought in retrospectively because the ruling party was charged with illegally receiving foreign funds for political activities from U.K.-based Vedanta Group from 2004 to 2012, thereby violating FCRA provisions. The case is still being heard in the Supreme Court.

After the amendment, a foreign company – often foreign multi-national giants – through their Indian arm/entity (where they may have more than 50% Indian holding) can fund Indian political parties. Effectively therefore, foreign companies can fund Indian political parties, through this arm. This raises serious concerns about circumventing the Representation of People's Act for foreign funding of Indian political parties.
 

The post Sitaram Yechury Calls Jaitley’s Bluff: On Loan Write-Offs and FCRA, the Govt is Misleading the Country appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The separation between State and religion is a critical aspect of a modern nation state like India that is rich with a multitude of religious, cultural and linguistic differences

Our basic problem today is the fundamentally flawed approach of the ruling sections which have tended to define secularism in practice as equality towards all religions whereas the Constitution that is founded on secular principles speaks of the need to separate religion from the State. This separation is a critical and defining aspect of a modern nation state like India that is rich with a multitude of religious, cultural and linguistic differences. In such a case, religion remains the choice of an individual and this right the State shall and is bound to protect.

But the moment the State intervenes to ensure equality between religions, and there is an overwhelming majority of one faith, that intervention inevitably and unfailingly favours the majority. This is exactly what we are witnessing in India today. Due to this flawed approach by the ruling political sections, whose practice post–Independence did not conform to what secularism must mean in terms of the modern Indian state, we are witnessing crude digressions today.

The argument that secularism is a foreign or a western notion being imposed on an inherently different Indian ethos is an apology for not being secular. The point is that the ethos of India and of any other country is not essentially different. Every culture, all peoples have their specificities but these in no way interfere or impinge on fundamental human impulses, needs and requirements. And here we are speaking of the fundamental principles of co–existence in a multi–dimensional reality.

It is imperative that the Indian state in a multi–religious, plural society like ours remains distanced from religion. This does not mean that the State is anti–religion; it only means that it will neither have nor assume a religious tinge or character. It will, in this very neutrality and also as a fundamental duty, protect the right of each and every citizen or individual living in its territory to his or her individual faith. That is, religion will and must remain in the private sphere.

This is especially critical in our situation where the evolution of the nation–state has been different from the European nation–state. Here, we have always had unity in a vast diversity. This diversity is not just religious, but linguistic and also includes various nationalities. To build a State writ within it, this concept of unity in a diverse situation such as this, requires that the commitment to secularism be all the more firm.

The argument, made in the converse by the right wing, that because of the diversity of India, the state needs to engage with different religions, then becomes even more slippery. Secularism in India will have to be richer and firmer in its separation because of this diverse reality. Besides, in India secularism and democracy are inseparable precisely because of this diversity. The protection of the right of the minority is the hallmark of the democracy. Secularism therefore is essential for a democracy.

The evolution of the modern state begins with Independence because the British colonial state was not modern. Secular democracy is the foundation of the modern Indian state. The foundation of the Constitution as a secular, democratic republic could be established in India even in the most trying times caused by Partition–related Holocaust and the assassination of Gandhi only because and only when the political class confronted communalism of both the majority and minority, frontally.

Hence, post–Partition, the RSS was banned in the wake of Gandhi’s assassination. The minority dropped the demand for communal electorates. Of great significance is the correspondence between Nehru and GB Pant on the Babri Masjid issue where Prime Minister Nehru decisively wrote that it was no business of the state to meddle in matters of faith and belief. The most significant such step was the Cabinet of India writing to the President, Rajendra Prasad when he wished to visit the Somnath temple, that he would have to undertake the trip in his personal capacity, not as President of the country.

These were the ideals on which the Indian state was founded. Even Sardar Patel, whom the fanatic right wing is so apt at misquoting, was clear that state should have nothing to do with affairs of religion. It was he who was, as much as Nehru, against state funds being used to re-build the Somnath temple. Therefore, the government did not rebuild the temple.

These are several instances where the state took a firm position on secularism. The moment there is dithering for reasons of political expediency, short cuts are taken and this faltering applies as much to the communal tendencies of the minority as the majority. Then the state in its compromised avatar appeases sections — the classic manifestation is the state’s behaviour vis–à–vis the shilanyas at Ayodhya and, post-Shah Bano judgement, towards the Muslim minority. The moment this short-circuiting became the accepted practice, secularism took a blow.

The Left has been the most consistent defendant of genuine secularism, against the dilution of secularism and erosion of secular values. It has always stated that separation between religion and state, not equality of religions, is the essence of secularism.

The moment you talk of equality for all religions, every arm of the state, instead of separating the state and its functioning from religions per se, begins a process of accommodation. And in this process of accommodation, majoritarianism inevitably creeps in.
 

The Left has also had the moral courage to admit and learn from its mistakes. There was a time when we went with the Muslim League in Kerala in the seventies. But in the early eighties, we reviewed this alliance on the basis of our experience. We concluded that the alliance was giving legitimacy to a religion–based political organisation and that this does not strengthen secularism. Moreover through the alliance, our respectability was used to further their sectarian agenda. So in the early eighties, on the basis of our experience in allying with them in the past, we not only ended the alliance but decided never to enter into it again. Because, in effect, we realised that in the process an unfortunate legitimacy was being accorded to a religion–based political formation and also that we were only helping them consolidate their base.

It was after the second and brutish dismissal of the EMS Namboodripad government in 1969 in Kerala, that a broad anti–Congress front consisting of all those willing to take on the Congress emerged, and in this broad alliance we sat with the League.

The government came to into existence in 1977, but ended soon thereafter.

The point is that the Left is the only force which, apart from taking a consistent theoretical and practical position on secularism, also had the moral strength to review an earlier association with a communal organisation after which we decided not to enter into such an alliance in the future.

Now, coming to the wings of the Indian state vis–à–vis secularism. The erosion of a genuine commitment to secularism by the dominant Indian political class and the executive was translated into similar departures from secular values by other wings of the state. Hence, even before the more bloody eighties, when pogroms of the kind we saw in Bhagalpur, Meerut–Malliana took place, in the 70s itself we saw the communalisation of the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) in UP.

This brings me back to my original point. The moment you talk of equality for all religions, every arm of the state, instead of separating the state and its functioning from religions per se, begins a process of accommodation. And in this process of accommodation, majoritarianism inevitably creeps in.

So, for instance, if you say that gurudwaras, or churches, or mosques, or temples are all right in a police station, what will be the result? Obviously there will be more temples, as Hindus are far more numerous in the political structures, institutions or government offices. This is how the different wings of the state have slowly got corrupted over the years: by the Indian state dithering on the principle of real secularism which is a distance from religion. It is only by taking a firm position and reasserting today that religion has nothing to do with the state that the Indian political class can hope to redeem a lost value.

Religion will always remain one instrument that the ruling classes will use to exploit the masses, divide people and do whatever else is necessary to consolidate their own rule. All the more reason that it, religion, be divorced from the state.

However, at the individual level, the equal right of all Indians to believe and to practice, propagate and enjoy that belief will be protected by the state. Moreover, secularism and the freedom of faith enjoined within it also mean that none could interfere in the exercise of that choice. So, in my personal life, I can be an atheist, Christian, Muslim or a Hindu. The state’s role is only to protect that individual human right.

Faced with the onslaught from a narrow and fanatic brand of religion, which has a distinct fascistic edge, the people of India, I am convinced, will eventually revolt against the cynical appropriation of that faith. The right wing fascist takeover of religion — of which browbeating the minority is an integral part, Gujarat being the ‘best’ example of this — is what we see at it’s height today.

But this phase cannot last for long because, apart from attacking minorities, this fascistic tendency has other consequences, too. A severe erosion of democracy and economic oppression of all people, regardless of their religious identity, will necessarily accompany the attack on Muslim minorities. Millions of people have been oppressed by the brutal economic policies of this regime; civil liberties and the right to question decisions of the state are being seriously undermined.

These issues are brewing at the grassroots level and brutal communal attacks are being used to divert public attention from them. Soon, these legitimate resentments will come to the surface and issues of oppression, economic and political, of all Indians — not just the unfortunate minorities — be highlighted and the autocratic designs of the fascist elements misusing religion will truly get exposed.

Let’s not forget that despite the harsh face of political Hinduism which we see today, the nineteenth century and even earlier history is replete with examples of strong Hindu reform movements that raised the very same issues that the broad Left is raising today. These were issues of oppression, the gender question and economic oppression by the ruling and influential sections.

It was these reform movements in the tribal belts and elsewhere that politically malevolent outfits like RSS/VHP infiltrated and appropriated. Don’t we know that the Vanvasi Kalyan Samitis existed within the reformist Hindu fold, formed to propagate land reforms, before the RSS, through the VHP, successfully appropriated them? Why did they feel the need to do so? These forces, which represent a class/caste and community driven authoritarian structure, the sangh parivar, saw that the empowering work being undertaken by such movements of reform, would, ultimately be a threat to them.

On both counts, I firmly believe that people will not tolerate the exploitation of their religious sentiments beyond a point. I see this happening sooner rather than later. The last three–four years of thoughtless economic policies have seen a serious incursion into the democratic rights and economic lives of a large number of Indian people. Soon we shall see mass protests of workers and the agricultural class and the impact of these protests.

Eventually, it will be the resurgence of these issues to the forefront of political and public life and discourse that will counter the erosion of the genuine secular principle. And then, hopefully, the move towards the restoration of genuine secularism will begin. n

(As told to Communalism Combat).

Archived from Communalism Combat, February 2003 Year 9  No. 84, Cover Story 3

The post State must stay aloof from religion appeared first on SabrangIndia.