Lok Sabha Debates
Moved The Resolution On Rehabilitation Of Sick Public Sector Undertakings. (Not ... on 17 July, 1998
Title: Moved the resolution on Rehabilitation of Sick public Sector Undertakings. (Not concluded) 1657 hours MR. CHAIRMAN: The House will now take up the Resolution on Rehabilitation of sick Public Sector Undertakings by Dr. Asim Bala Before we take up the Resolution for discussion, we have to fix the time for it. Shall we fix it for two hours?
SEVERAL HON. MEMBERS: Yes, Sir, two hours should be fixed.
MR. CHAIRMAN: All right. So, two hours have been fixed for this Resolution.
Now, Dr. Asim Bala to initiate the debate.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI P.S. GADHAVI (KUTCH): Sir, what about the third Resolution of Shri Vaiko?... (Interruptions)... There is a third Resolution also in today's List of Business. That also is a very important Resolution. If you spare some time for it, say one hour for the second Resolution and one hour for the third Resolution, that will be better.
MR. CHAIRMAN: There are three or four speakers to participate in the second Resolution. I think, we will get the time for the third Resolution also.
SHRI P.S. GADHAVI (KUTCH): Sir, the third Resolution is of Shri Vaiko on Nationalisation of Inter-State rivers.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Let us see how the things progress.
Now, let Dr. Asim Bala speak.
1657 hours DR. ASIM BALA (NABADWIP): Mr. Chairman, Sir, in 1954, Parliament accepted the socialistic pattern of society as the national objective and the industrial policy was revised in 1956.
Under the revised new policy, industries were specified in two schedules, Industries specified in Schedule A and Schedule B. Industries specified in Schedule A were such as arms and ammunition, Defence equipment, atomic energy, iron and steel, minerals, oil, aircraft, air transport, railway transport, ship buildings, telephone, electricity, etc. Industries specified in Schedule B were such as ferro-alloy and tool steel, basic and intermediate products required by chemical industries, such as the manufacture of drugs, dye stuff and plastics, antibiotics, fertilisers, synthetic rubber, chemical pulp, road and sea transports, etc. Sir, the concept of the public sector as envisaged by our first Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was that the public investment should be made in the core sectors where the infrastructure has to be built, and because of its long gestation period and low profitability, private investment would not be possible.
Sir, out of the 242 Central public sector units, 130 made profits and nearly 112 units are in the red book during the last few years.
Over 80 public sector units have transit facility. Only ten companies, including the Navratnas, have been contributing over two-third of the profit. Some of the companies originally set up by the Government have become sick over a period of time and their names have been registered with the BIFR. They are about sixty.
The nine top public sector units called Navratna are: Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd., Bharat Petroleum Corporation, Indian Oil Corporation, Indian Petro-Chemicals Ltd., National Thermal Power Corporation, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, Steel Authority of India, and Videsh Sanchar Nigam. These are called the Navratnas. Out of 242 Central public sector units, sixty are referred to the BIFR. As I mentioned, they were in the list as on 31.3.1997. Besides, about forty and odd public sector units are making losses for various reasons.
The total accumulated loss of some of the public sector enterprises in 1989-90 was Rs.9511 crore. The public sector could achieve several objectives in removing inter-regional disparities and earning a reasonable rate of return for generating surpluses for further investment, for building of infrastructure, generation of employment opportunities, diversification of the economy and promotion of rapid economic growth. Can we think of our economy without public enterprises today? If we close them, the economy may come to a halt. All the infrastructural services are provided by them, all the basic, key and strategic goods are manufactured by them. All the finances are provided by them. A large measure of managerial and technical talents are supplied by them.
The public sector units employed totally about three million of workers. Now only about twenty lakh of workers are working there after the reform process was set in in 1991. The compensation of the lossmaking and sick public sector units reveals that they can be the vital sector of the industrial economy comprising fertilizer, steel, coal, heavy electricals, engineering, textile, construction, wagon building, besides consumer goods. The products of most of the sick and loss-making public sector units are having active demand in the market. Many of them relate to food security of the country and input availability in the industrial sector. The Central public sector contributes nearly 100 per cent of the products like coal, petroleum, copper, primary lead and lignite, and more than 60 per cent of steel, aluminium and zinc. This clearly indicates that a key position is occupied by the public sector in the nation's economy.
Once a sick public sector undertaking is referred to the BIFR, from the date of registration with the BIFR it could be seen that the revival of most of the sick public sector undertakings are hurdled basically because of the negative stance of the concerned Government when it comes to acting as a promoter. There are many such cases. For example, there are the cases of Haldia Fertilizers and the IDPL. It is very much essential to revive the IDPL.
In Maharashtra, the National Textiles Corporation has about 606 hectares of surplus land valued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes at Rs.2,389 crore. Of this, over Rs.1,900 crore worth of land is located in Mumbai. Some industry is interested in the land of the sick but not in the company itself, which is the sad story of our country.
The plea taken by the Government and the anti-public sector lobby in the polity is that spending for revival of sick public sector undertakings is unproductive. It is totally unfounded. While considering the cases for revival of sick public sector undertakings, only their losses and liabilities are taken into account but not the opportunity cost and the replacement cost of the sick public sector undertaking considered for closure.
In most of the cases, sickness results because of the Government's failure to ensure timely modernisation. As on date, the Government wants to wash off their hands of the sick public sector undertakings by denying them support in a most unfair manner.
The Reserve Bank has studied the reasons for sickness about ten years ago and found that fifty-two per cent of sickness was due to bad management of the company; the embezzlement by the management such as diversion of funds, conflict between management and workers, etc. Only two per cent of the sickness was due to the workers and employees. This is the picture in most of the cases.
In many cases, restructuring of finances would help the sick public sector undertakings to come out of the BIFR and tide over the problem. But in most of such cases, the Government assumes a negative attitude. For example, the current Budget has demonstrated the totally negative attitude of the Government towards revival of sick public sector undertakings. The sick public sector undertakings were referred to in the Budget only while stating the provisions relating to closure, payments to be made on retrenchment and on voluntary retirement. Such an approach is injurious to the interests of the national economy. When the budgetary proposals indicate the path of abolition of the public sector undertakings, it is very dangerous for the nation.
If a public sector undertaking is referred to the BIFR, the banks and financial institutions stop giving advances even for the working capital. As a result, productive work suffers and loss gets multiplied, complicating the prospect of revival. It is a matter of record that while many of the sick and loss-making public sector undertakings have to suspend production owing to non-availability of working capital and various other reasons, the same products are being imported in increasing quantities, spending precious foreign exchange. The case of fertilizers is one example in this regard.
I have given the inputs.
Coming to raw jute, in 1995-96, 42,000 tonnes of raw jute was imported at the cost of Rs.48 crore. In 1996-97, 48,000 tonnes of raw jute were imported at the cost of Rs.76 crore.
As far as fertilizer and fertilizer mate is concerned, the quantity imported was 10585 tonnes at the cost of Rs. 5626 crore. During 1996-97, the quantity imported was 7045 tonnes at the cost of Rs.3235.
In the case of medicines and pharmaceutical products also, Rs.1358 crore worth of goods were imported during the year 1995-96 and during 1996-97 the value was Rs. 1089 crore. In the case of iron and steel also, the import has been increasing day by day. When the demand is growing, instead of making our public sector units sick, we should revive them. To meet the demand, we are importing these goods from other countries thereby wasting valuable foreign exchange. This in turn liquidates the public sector units.
Eight fertilizer plants are languishing in sickness. Side by side fertilizer import is increasing every year which is also provoking urea scam. For example, one fertilizer plant at Durgapur could be revived by investment of a few hundred crores of rupees while to have a new fertilizer plant like Durgapur it would cost more than Rs. 4000 crore.
Bharat Opthalmic Glass Limited, the only producer of flint button in the country could be revived by an investment of only few crores. But the Government prefers to close it down to indulge in imports. Government may argue that import is cheaper. But what about the social cost due to loss of productive employment. Unemployment not only affects the workers but also their families. The families are affected due to the closure of the public sector units. It has vitiated the socio-economic aspects also.
The Government is denying support to even wagon-building industry in public sector although the country is suffering from shortage of wagon supply affecting the goods traffic. Cost of closure and non-revival of wagon-building units would be much higher than the investment cost for revival which is not being taken into account. Many more similar examples can be cited to expose the ill-conceived idea of doing away with the sick Central Public Sector Units.
I know the Railways' share in the freight traffic has come down from eighty per cent to twenty per cent. We are not using wagons and we are importing containers. If we want containers, we can use these companies for manufacturing containers instead of wagons. In that way we can revive the wagon industry.
To summarise, the Government policies towards sick public sector undertakings are not only permanently blocking the prospect of revival of sick public sector undertakings, but also causing severe damage to the health of industrial economy of the country. The production capacity lying with the sick public sector undertakings and the employment therein, could in no way be recreated or compensated once they are closed down; and the market would be built by the foreign companies. Will it serve the national interest?
The Government must consider the social and employment costs, the opportunity cost and also the cost of over-dependence on import, while considering the cases of revival of the sick public sector undertakings with all seriousness and particularly in considering the above things and also the vital sectors represented by those sick public sector undertakings. The Government must take positive steps for revival of sick public sector undertakings. Minimum commitment to national interest warrants positive and expeditious steps for revival of sick public sector undertakings.
The Tewari Committee Report in 1985 on industrial sickness has argued that the primary effort should be rehabilitation which would inevitably require sacrifices from the State and the Central Governments, banks and financial institutions, management and labour.
The IMF pointed out that only petroleum companies were profitable, but not those producing textiles, fertilizers, steel, heavy engineering products. It is quite absurd, and the intention of the IMF and the World Bank is to dismantle our public sector. That is why they are saying all these things. Why are they telling all this? After the process of delicensing and industrial liberalisation which began in 1991, technology-driven-PSUs found themselves rapidly losing ground to multi-nationals. The public sector is one area of the economy because it is politically very sensitive in nature when liberalisation has failed to make an impact. Unless the PSUs are overhanded, India's economic growth may lose the momentum it has attained at present.
Certainly, the PSUs require changes in its modus operandi, but the causes of welfare - regional and sectoral balances - are rather in the names of public sector which is needed to our country. It also requires economic and fiscal developments of the PSUs which needs political will. It is lacking in our Government.
I also have some suggestions to make. We have to detect irregularities early, in any account and we have to take remedial measures. Lesser the time taken in having remedial measures, lesser the chances of sickness. Early detection and quick action are paramount in combating the problem of industrial sickness. Regular review statements and subsequent steps are essential for solving any problem in industries. Serious action should be taken against sticky accounts and persistent delays.
I have to mention one more point. Technological upgradation, modernisation, renovation, diversification, etc., on a continuous basis will prevent industrial sickness. Sometimes, the management itself makes the companies sick intentionally. It is due to the new economic policy of the Government as well as of the international trade situation. In developed countries, production and growth are very fast and they are not searching for a new market in Asian countries where huge demand is available for this market.
At the end, I would just read out a portion of the record of the Report of the World Health Organisation, November, 1997.
"It is thus clear that the Uruguay Round of negotiations were largely dominated by industrialised countries and that developing countries were constrained to accept commitments sometimes running counter to their economy and social development. According to the World Development Report for 1997, if the poor countries are very often the losers in globalisation, this is because the rules of the games, especially in international trade are not in their favour."
I know that the revival of the public sector is very important. If our public sector is not revived, then the production of our country will not improve. The previous Minister of Commerce gave free licence for import of some agricultural products and also some essential commodities which we need everyday. The New Economic Policy is in the interest of the multinationals and the big foreign companies. So, we should take into account our national interest and revive our sick industries by any means.
With these words, I conclude my speech.
(ends) ">1722 hours SHRI SHIVRAJ V. PATIL (LATUR): Sir, I thank you for giving me the time. Dr. Asim Bala has come before this House with a very important Resolution. You may allow me to say that he has presented the case in the best possible manner and we should congratulate him also. His Resolution reads like this:
"This House urges upon the Government to take concrete and effective steps to rehabilitate the sick Public Sector Undertakings under the control of the Central Government and formulate a comprehensive policy to improve the functioning of the Public Sector Undertakings."
This Resolution can be divided into two parts. One part relates to the sick industries and the other part relates to the policy of the Government of India to see that the public sector industries are encouraged. We shall have to look at this Resolution from these two angles. I think that, in India, we have public sector industries which are doing well. I am not going to give the statistics and all that. Dr. Asim Bala has done it very well and the hon. Minister also has statistics which I do not have readily with me. There are some industries which are not sick and are not doing very well also. And there are industries which are sick.
Public sector industries are sick. Now, it would be necessary for us to see that the industries which are doing very well are encouraged. About the industries which are not doing very well but which can do well or which can become sick, we shall need a kind of a policy. Sick industries will certainly have to be looked into and we shall have to take a decision either to continue with them or we have to discontinue them. That kind of a decision would be required. This is about the public sector industry.
What about cooperative sector industry? The cooperative industries are not really public sector industries nor are they private sector industries. They are industries which are run by the private individuals coming together for the benefit of all those who are members of the cooperatives. Fortunately in some areas, cooperative industry has done very well. The cooperative industry has not done very well in some other areas. In some areas, the cooperative industry has become sick. What is true about the public sector industry is also true about the cooperative sector industry. We do have private sector industry also in the country. We know that there are private sector industries which are doing extremely well and which can compete with the industries in any other part of the world which are doing well. But there are industries which are not doing well and which can become sick or which can improve their working. Certainly, there are many private sector industries which have not done well. Now, one of the sectors of the private sector industry is the textile industry. The textile industry in Maharashtra and Gujarat and in some other parts of India has not done well. It has become sick. That is exactly why the textile industry in private sector had to be taken over by the Government and had to be run as National Textiles Corporation mills. The jute industry in West Bengal has not done well. The jute and the textile industries were the first industries which were started but which have not done well and which have gone sick. In Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, we have the sugar industry which is in the private, the cooperative and the Government sectors and which have also gone sick.
If we have to consider the sickness or copability of the industries to manage their affairs and do well, we do not have only to see the industries in public sector or industries in cooperative sector or industries in private sector. Let us treat all these industries as national sector industries. Let us apply our mind to it.
The policy which we have followed in India is that of mixed economy. We do not want the private sector industries to go out or we do not want public sector industries also to go out. We do not want that the cooperative sector industries be closed down. We would certainly allow the private sector industries to increase in the area of their activities if there are private persons willing to take that risk and come forth and start the private industries. If there are cooperative industries, we would like to encourage the cooperative industries. And public sector industries also are necessary.
It is very interesting to examine what is the position in other developed countries - in the `Socialist' countries and the erstwhile `Communist' countries. My impression is that in the United States of America, they have the Government industries, the public sector industries, the cooperative industries as well as the private sector industries. The private sector industries in that country are very strong. The cooperative industries are not that strong. And the public sector industries are certainly working in areas which are using the advanced technology. The futuristic industries are there. If you go to the countries which call themselves as `Socialist' countries, you will find that the public sector industries are very strong. They do have some cooperative industries which are not very strong and the private sector industries are very weak. That means, the public sector, the cooperative sector and the private sector industries are existing in India. They are existing in countries which have accepted the principle of laissez faire, free economy, market economy or whatever you call it. And they are existing in the areas where the Socialist type of economy or the Communist type of economy is accepted. So, what are the conclusions that we can draw from these things? The private sector industries or the cooperative sector industries or the public sector industries can suffer. Why will they suffer?
Now, we shall have to examine why have they suffered? What can be done to see that they do not suffer? One of the reasons is that they have not kept pace with the modern technology which is developed. The industry once established may be modern. But after some time, it does not remain modern. If the process of modernisation of the industry is not continued, that industry is bound to suffer. The textile industry, the jute industry and the sugar industry were modern industries. But now those industries are suffering. Today, we have the automobile industry. Probably, it is prospering. But a time may come that if they do not modernise, they will also suffer. We have the oil industry which is doing well. It is mainly in the public sector. It is doing well because it is using the most modern technology. It is prospering. But if they do not keep pace with the technology, which is available all over the world and use that technology, they are also bound to suffer.
One of the things which have been happening in our country is that when they earn, they earn a lot of profit. The textile industry did earn a lot of profit; the jute industry did earn a lot of profit; the sugar industry of Maharashtra is earning a lot of profit but I am afraid that the sugar industry, especially in the cooperative sector, might go sick. Why would they go sick? It is because when they are earning, they are not saving for modernisation. When they have enough money with them, if they save and set aside a certain amount of money for modernisation, then they will not suffer in the future. But if they are earning and pocketing the money, using the money and if they are earning and diverting that money to the most modern industry and not using that money for purposes of modernisation of their industry, then they are likely to suffer. That is what has happened to the private sector industries ; that is what is going to happen to the cooperative sector industries and that is what is happening in the public sector industries as well.
There is scope for modernisation in the public sector industries. But then the procedure is such that they do not keep on modernising and because they do not keep on modernising, they suffer. If you talk to the people in the public sector industries and discuss the matter with them they would tell you that there is political interference in it. Again, if you talk to the politicians they would tell you that these industries are not being managed on a commercial basis and that is why they are suffering. I think, there is a grain of truth in both these arguments. There may be some political interference and there could also be mismanagement by the industry as well. Both these things have to be controlled.
They are asking for autonomy. I know and I had also the opportunity of dealing with public sector industries which had autonomy. I found that the industries which were having autonomy were not doing well and the industries which were having less autonomy were doing well. So, that is not the only issue. The aspect of scientific management of the public sector industries or the cooperative sector industries or the private sector industries has to be very very carefully examined. Let them have the best technology available; let them keep on updating that technology and also save for modernisation. The modern kind of management is available to help the industries.
There are two very important things in the public and private sector industries to which we just cannot refuse to look at. The public sector industries are answerable to the Parliament. They are answerable to the Minister and the Ministry and also are responsible to the public at large. They have no stakes and it is managed in a fashion in which it should not be managed. The private sector industries are not run in that way. There, the decisions are taken quickly and the decisions are taken in such a fashion that they can save money by going in a circuitous route and overstepping the laws and things like that. The public sector industries are required to compete with the private sector industries. Now, that creates a lot of problem.
Sir, my point was that let us look at these industries from these two angles. Today, we are talking about the free market economy and the market forces. I am one of those who is not opposed to the market forces per se. I am not saying that the market forces are not required; the private enterprises are not required and the private initiatives are not required. I am not going to say that. But I am of the firm view that today we need public sector industries and tomorrow, probably, we would need public sector industries more than we do it today. I could be asked to as to how I could dare to make a statement of this kind when the world is moving towards privatisation and not towards public sector. I do feel that if we are going to exist in the present circumstances, in the present situation, probably, the private sector industries will become very very important but we are not going to stand here. We are going to march in a different direction which has not yet been visualized by some of us.
If tomorrow the ocean resources are going to be used by the industry, the raw material coming from the ocean is going to be used by the industry, take it from me that for the next 50 years, the private sector industries are not going to enter into that area. It would be necessary to for the public sector industries to see that the resources which are there in the ocean are utilised. We do not realize that a country like India has an economic zone which is equal to two-thirds of our land mass and two-thirds of this land mass is having a lot of raw materials which are not being used.
It is virgin land. It is not being used because the private sector is not paying attention towards it, and the public sector is not attracted towards it today. But soon the time is going to come when we would be using resources of the ocean and at that time it would be the public sector industry which would initiate utilizing resources of the ocean. The same would be the case with respect to the utilization of potentials in Space. In all other countries, like America, Soviet Union, China and India also, there are both private sector and public sector industries which are engaged in the Space industry but that is an area which is unlimited. There is a limit to the land or the ocean but there is no limit to the Space and there is no limit to the potentials that are available in Space. If the human ingenuity is used and technology is developed, and if today we wish to tap the potentials available in the Space, we need a public sector industry. The private sector industry will not enter that area because it needs a lot of gestation period. The private sector will not enter an area where a lot of funds are required. The private sector will not enter an area where there is a lot of uncertainty, where there is no assurance of a profit. But for the good of the country as a whole or for the good of the society or the humanity as a whole these areas cannot just be left unattended. These areas cannot be allowed to go un-utilized. And, if these areas are to be utilized, we shall have to develop the public sector industry.
What is the situation in our country with regard to the development of technology? Who develops the technology? In America the technology is developed by the industry. Knowledge is developed by the university and technology is developed by the industry. They too have laboratories like our National Laboratory. In India, what is the position? If we have to develop a technology, no private sector industry is willing to spend money for developing the technology. Technology is going to be an industry in itself. Nothing is going to be more important or more expensive than the technology or the knowledge in the ultimate analysis. We have the raw materials. We have the machines to produce machines but technology is not available. And, if we have to develop technology, we would need a public sector's initiative, the Government's initiative and the society's initiative also and that is why I am very humbly submitting to the hon. Minister and to this House to have a policy in which we would mark the areas which would be occupied by the public sector industries up to a specific time. Let the public sector industries vacate those areas and let they be taken over by the private sector industries. If they have the strength, the muscles and the aspiration to do something in that area, we should allow them to take those areas. But there are new areas which are unattended, which have not yet attracted our attention. Those areas cannot go unattended. Let the public sector industries enter those areas. Let them show their mettle in those areas. Having shown their mettle in those areas, if again the private sector industries want to enter those areas, let them take over. There would be " सितारों से आगे जहां और भी है"।
I think the hon. Minister can understand this couplet very well. " सितारों से आगे जहां और भी है"।
There are many worlds beyond stars. There are many areas which could be attended to by the public sector industries. So, the policy of the Government of India, I am not saying the policy of only India but the policy of the humanity, should be to allow individuals to use their potentials to the maximum. Let the cooperatives also develop and use their potentials to the maximum. Let the public sector units develop inter-need area. Let there be the initiators in the new areas. If we have a policy of this kind, I think we would be able to see that the strength which is developed in the public sector is transferred to the private sector.
The public sector should enter new areas and develop new technologies. If you expand, you are not going to sink. If you do not expand, if you stop expanding, you are going to sink; the industry is going to sink and ultimately it is going to die. Expansion is the sign of existence. If you expand, things will happen.
I would say that the hon. Member has brought a very important resolution here. Attendance in the House may be thin; it may be a Private Member's Bill; it may have been taken up at the last moment; but it is a very important thing. If we have an occasion to discuss this matter at the time of discussing the Budget or on any other occasion; if some time is utilised to discuss this Bill, it is properly utilised. We need a policy which is very progressive; we need a policy which is not bound by the narrow ideologies the ideology of public sector, the ideology of private sector, the ideology of cooperative sector. Our ideology should be nationalistic ideology, humanistic ideology. The ideology should be as big as that and then only it will help.
Thank you.
(ends) ">1741 hours SHRI S. MALLIKARJUNIAH (TUMKUR): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for giving me an opportunity to speak on this Private Members' Bill. I heartily congratulate Dr. Laxminarayan Pandey who had piloted a Private Members' Bill following which the Government had agreed to bring an exhaustive Bill. Secondly, Dr. Asim Bala has also piloted a very important Private Members' Bill. He also deserves to be heartily congratulated.
We have got one public undertaking in Tumkur known as HMT. It started 15-20 years back. It was doing very well. It was making a huge profit. The Managing Director and the Chairman who were at the helm of affairs of that undertaking were men of very high standards. They were the people who ran this industry very successfully. Unfortunately the Tumkur HMT and Bangalore HMT are being tagged on with the Nanital Watch Manufacturing Unit and also Srinagar Watch Manufacturing unit. As a consequence of this, the company is running in loss when the profit made by the company as a whole is taken.
There is keen competition to HMT watches. Some of the officers who were working in HMT earlier were allowed to retire. They were appointed in various other competitive watch manufacturing companies. As a result of this, the knowhow which was in the hands of the HMT became available to the other companies in the field. This has contributed to losses to a great extent. In the Tenth Lok Sabha, I brought this issue to the notice of the then Minister of Heavy Industries, Shrimati Krishna Sahi. I appraised her of the bad situation the HMT was in. She immediately appointed a Committee consisting of eminent people with deep knowledge in heavy industries. The Committee made its recommendations. Implementation of those recommendations had resulted in the revival of the company which was till that time virtually living on oxygen.
Unfortunately, HMT is once again sinking now. It has more than 20000 people who are dependent on it. Pujya Swamiji of Shivaganga Mutt has given more than 100 acres of very valuable land which was attached to the Mutt. Swamiji gave this land because a new industry is coming up just by the side of the Mutt. Unfortunately, that industry is sinking now. It needs huge inflow of funds.
I brought the matter to the notice of the hon. Minister of Heavy Industries. I have also written a letter requesting the authorities to at least sanction Rs.100 crore to this industry in the form of loan so that it could survive and pay back the amount in time. We request the hon. Minister to provide Rs.100 crore for this industry.
Why should the industry become sick? The reason is sufficient funds are not flowing well in time.
Manufactured goods reach the market and the same are sold. But they are not getting back the money immediately due to various reasons. There is a nexus between the officer and the dealer. For some short period and sometime for a longer period, money is left in the hands of the dealer and they treat it as capital and for further investment.
Efficient people shall have to be appointed as Managing Directors and as Chairmen. But unfortunately people are appointed on the basis of caste or relationship. This is one of the weaknesses. They should really search and choose the people who have been well-versed in the industrial management. If that is the case, I think, industries may not go sick. Accountability shall have to be fixed on the concerned authority.
When I was a Member of the Legislative Council and when Shri S.R. Bommai was a Central Minister for Industries, I asked him, why does he choose IAS officers as Managing Directors of these public sector undertakings, as if they know everything and they are the best persons to head the organisations? I have not at all received any reply for five to six years. When I personally met him, he said that there are a lot of secrets and I should not know them. This is the unfortunate state of affairs. Of course, it needs a lot of managerial tactics and good knowledge in business management. But unfortunately, the Government is not appointing the people who are in the field of industries. They should appoint well-trained person in trade or business as Managing Directors or Chairmen.
Unfortunately, the previous Government had not applied its mind very seriously in this direction. I think, the present Government will certainly take into account the suggestions made by us and consult the efficient people in the industries. Their knowledge should also be taken into consideration.
Government is giving subsidy but it is not received in time. This is one of the reasons for not releasing the manufactured goods to the market in time. Banks are not advancing money in time. Unnecessarily they ask the manufacturers and company people to come to their banks now and then. They consume a lot of time and in the process disbursement is delayed. There is a lot of pilferage and corruption at this stage. It is up to the Ministry of Heavy Industries to go very deep into this matter and to see that such industries are revived and those which are sick, should be brought to life. We should keep in mind that huge sums of money is spent in starting these industries.
Research and development work should also be provided. Corrupt officers and inefficient officers should be removed. There should be a Committee consisting of very efficient people in the field of industry. Their suggestions shall have to be taken into consideration. We should find out the units which are functioning very well, and which are the units that are very sick. They shall have to be assessed impartially. Huge funds shall have to be provided on loan basis and not on grant basis.Efficient managers and efficient Chairman and Managing Director should be appointed. Accountability should be fixed on them and they should be made responsible for any loss which is incurred by the corporation.
We had one NGF, which is still lingering. Of course, during the period of one or two persons, it was running well. But when appointments were made on the basis of caste or on political basis, virtually the most prime industry like NGF is about to be sunk and the property around the vacant site of NGF is regularly sold just to meet the salary expenses. This is an unfortunate state of affairs. I would like to know from the Government, why such things have happened. Who is mainly responsible for this? Who is responsible for the appointment of such inefficient officers who have no farsightedness? Who is there to question all these things?
Over and above, this matter was raised on the floor of this House as well as in the Karnataka Assembly, but unfortunately, our Government has not opened its mind to go deep into it.
Lastly, I thank the Chairman for having given me an opportunity. I would once again draw the attention of the hon. Minister that HMT of Tumkur is life for us. More than 50,000 people are working there and their lives are in the hands of the hon. Minister. I would request the hon. Minister to sanction Rs.100 crore immediately and appoint efficient people to manage it. I would also request the hon. Minister to appoint a Committee to go deep into the subject. Let it suggest some model things and let they be implemented so that the industry could run very well.
Thank you very much.
(ends) "> १७५२ बजे डा. लक्षमीनारायण पाण्डेय (मंदसौर) : सभापति महोदय, हम एक अत्यंत गंभीर विषय जो औद्योगिक विकास और भारत की अर्थनीति से संबंध रखता है, उस पर विचार कर रहे हैं। मूल प्रस्ताव हमारे माननीय मित्र ने यहां प्रस्तुत किया है, उसकी भावना भी यही है कि जो रुग्ण औद्योगिक उपक़म है, जिन्हें सार्वजनिक उपक़म कहा जाता है, उनमें सुधार हो, वे ठीक हों और आर्िथक सक्षमता की ओर बढ़ते हुए हम सबकी की मदद कर सकें। इस विषय में मेरा निवेदन है कि जब ये पब्िलक इंटरप्राइजेज शुरू हुए थे उस समय यह भावना थी कि इनसे काफी लोगों को रोजगार मिलेगा। इन उद्योगों और अन्य उद्योगों से लोगों के बीच में एक स्वस्थ प्रतिस्पर्धा आयेगी। नश्िचत रूप से कुछ समय तक इन सार्वजनिक उपक़मों द्वारा यह कार्य किया भी गया, काफी बड़ी मात्रा में इन उद्योंगों में लोग लगे भी थे और इन उद्योगों में काफी उत्पादन भी शुरू हुआ। लेकिन धीरे-धीरे इनके ऊपर सरकारी नियंत्रण शुरू हुआ तथा इनमें कुप्रबंध शुरू हुआ और उस कुप्रबंध के कारण और सरकारी शिकंजे में जकड़ने के कारण उनकी स्वायत्तता समाप्त होने लगी। जैसे-जैसे स्वायत्तता समाप्त होती गई उनका उत्पादन भी घटता गया और वे वायबल यूनिटस नहीं रहे। उनकी उत्पादन क्षमता में निरंतर ास हुआ, जिसके कारण इन्हें भारी आर्िथक हानि उठानी पड़ी। मैं उन उपक़मों के कुछ उदाहरण देना चाहूंगा जिन्होंने काफी नुकसान उठाया है। आज उनकी स्िथति रिवाइवल जैसी नहीं है। मैं निवेदन करना चाहूंगा कि फर्टीलाइजर कापर्ोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया में वर्तमान में लॉस ५३८.०२ करोड़ रुपये का है, हिंदुस्तान फर्टीलाइजर कापर्ोरेशन ५३२.६४ करोड़ रुपये, ईस्टर्न कोल फील्डस ३४१.१५ करोड़ रुपये, भारत कोकिंग कोल ३२२.८१ करोड़ रुपये, एयर इंडिया २९६.४९ करोड़ रुपये, राष्ट्रीय इस्पात निगम २४५.९४ करोड़ रुपये, इंडियन आयरन एंड स्टील कंपनी २१३.०३ करोड़ रुपये, सीमेंट कापर्ोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया १५९.४१ करोड़ रुपये, इंडियन ड़ग्स एंड फार्मास्युटिकल लमिटेड १५१.२४ करोड़ रुपये और हिंदुस्तान शिपयार्ड १५०.८० करोड़ रुपये के लॉस में हैं। मैंने कुछ उपक़मों के नाम यहां उद्धृत किये हैं जिनमें निरंतर घटा हुआ है और वह घाटा बढ़कर ५८६२ करोड़ रुपये हो गया है। आज ऐसी स्िथति बन गई है कि हमें इन उपक़मों के बारे में सोचने के लिए विवश होना पड़ रहा है कि इन उपक़मों के बारे में कया किया जाए। यद्यपि कुछ उपक़म ऐसे हैं जिनके बारे में यह कहा गया है कि इनको बी.आई.एफ.आर. के सुपुर्द कर दिया जाए और वह इनको पुनर्जीवित करने के लिए काम करे। यह बात भी सही है कि हमारी नौवीं पंचवर्षीय योजना में भी इनके बारे में एक उदारतापूर्ण विचार दिया गया है और इनकी जनरेशन कैसे बढ़े और इनके रिसोर्सेस को हम कैसे मोबिलाइज कर सकें उसके बारे में भी इनको कैसे सक्षम बनाया जाए, इसका प्रयत्न किया गया है। मैं समझता हूं कि यदि इनको सक्षम बनाया जाए तो ठीक हो सकता है। आज जो हमारे सार्वजनिक उपक़म हैं, उनमें लगभग ५३ प्रतिशत इन्वैस्टमेंट सिर्फ आठ इंडस्ट्रीज के अंदर लगा हुआ है। इनमें स्टील इंडस्ट्री, कोल इंडस्ट्री, केमिकल्स इंडस्ट्री, फर्टीलाइजर्स, फार्मास्यूटीकल्स, पेट्रोलियम और दूसरी इंडस्ट्रीज हैवी इंडीनियरिंग आदि हैं। अभी हमारे माननीय सदस्य श्री शिवराज पाटिल जी सहकारी उपक़मों, निजी उपक़मों और सरकारी उपक़मों के बारे में बोल रहे थे। नश्िचतरूप से कहीं-कहीं सरकारी उपक़म बहुत सफल हुए हैं, लेकिन वे सर्वत्र सफल नहीं हैं। जहां इस प्रकार के सरकारी उपक़म सफल नहीं हैं, तो नश्िचतरूप से सहकारी उपक़मों को प्राथमिकता देकर के, उन्हें आगे लाना चाहिए, लेकिन सहकारी उपक़मों में भी जो सरकारी शिकंजा है, वह बराबर बढ़ता जा रहा है और उसके कारण वे भी आज उसी प्रकार की स्िथति में हैं जैसी कि सरकारी उपक़मों की स्िथति है। उनके बारे में गंभीरता पूर्वक विचार किया जाकर निर्णय लेने की आवश्यकता है। मैं आपसे निवेदन करना चाहूंगा कि अगर कोई ऐसा कारण है कि इनको स्वायत्ता दी जाए, तो सरकार में बैठे हुए बड़े-बड़े जो आई.ए.एस.अधिकारी हैं और जो सैक़ेट्री लैवल के अधिकारी हैं, वे जाकर कहीं मैनेजिंग डायरैकटर बनते हैं, डायरैकटर बनते हैं, उनकी बहुत भारी तनख्वाह होती है, उनकी सारी सुविधाएं होती हैं और उनके पास जो हमारी इंडस्ट्री हैं वे सब की सब घाटे में हैं। हमारे मध्यप्रदेश में शकर उद्योग सहकारी क्षेत्र में हैं, वह आज इसीलिए घाटे में हैं कि वे एक प्रकार से सरकारी नियंत्रण में आ गए हैं। ठीक इसी प्रकार से नैशनल टैकसटाइल कापर्ोरेशन के बारे में भी अभी चर्चा हुई। उसकी आज स्िथति कया है, सीमेंट इंडस्ट्री की आज स्िथति कया है? मेरे क्षेत्र में दो-तीन सीमेंट इंडस्ट्री हैं। आज उनकी दुर्दशा हो रही है। वे बहुत अच्छा उत्पादन करने वाली हैं, उनमें बहुत अच्छी मशीनें लगी हुई हैं SHRI SHIVRAJ V. PATIL (LATUR): Let us understand that the national textile industry is not an industry started by the Government of India. The sick industries in the private sector are taken over by the Government of India.
DR. LAXMINARAYAN PANDEY (MANDSAUR): But also, the National Textiles Corporation is in loss.
SHRI SHIVRAJ V. PATIL (LATUR): All the sick industries are run by the Government of India.