Lok Sabha Debates
Further Discussion On The Motion For Consideration Of The State Bank Of India ... on 11 August, 2011
> Title: Further discussion on the motion for consideration of the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks Laws) Amendment Bill, 2009, moved by Shri Narain Meena on 05.08.2011 (Discussion concluded and Bill passed).
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Now, we will take up Item No. 17.
Shri Nishikant Dubey.
श्री निशिकांत दुबे (गोड्डा): महोदय, मैं यहां से बोलना चाहता हूं।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय : ठीक है।
श्री निशिकांत दुबे : महोदय, एक तारीख से यह स्टेट बैंक का बिल लगा हुआ है और आज 11 तारीख को शायद ऐसा लगता है कि यह खत्म हो जायेगा।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय : शायद आज खत्म हो जाये।
श्री निशिकांत दुबे : पार्लियामेंट किस तरह से चल रही है, आप इसकी बानगी देखिये और इसके दोषी कौन हैं, यह जनता देख रही है। उस दिन चूंकि मेरा भाषण अधूरा रह गया था तो जैसे सिनेमा में होता है कि फ्लैश बैक स्टार्ट होता है, मुझे लगता है कि अपना भाषण री-कॉल करने के लिए मुझे फ्लैश बैक में जाना पड़ेगा।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय : आप ज्यादा फ्लैश बैक में मत जाइये।
श्री निशिकांत दुबे : महोदय, फ्लैश बैक में इसलिए जाना पड़ रहा है क्योंकि उस दिन भाषण देते-देते मैं डीरेल हो गया था। मेरी डीरेलमेंट यह थी, जो आज माननीय जोशी जी कह रहे थे कि अलौकिका पण्डिततः की तरह, जिस तरह से जो पंडित हैं, माननीय प्रधानमंत्री मनमोहन सिंह जी, प्रणब बाबू, जो वित्त मंत्री हैं, मोंटेक सिंह जी हैं, सुब्बाराव जी हैं या रंगराजन जी हैं, वे किस तरह से किताब देखकर नीतियां बना रहे हैं और वे नीतियां किस तरह से देश को बर्बाद कर रही हैं। दूसरी बात यह है कि एक कहानी हम पढ़ते थे कि नवाब वाजिद अली शाह का जमाना था और लखनऊ विलासिता के रंग में डूबा हुआ था। उसकी पहचान यह है कि जब हम प्राइज राइस पर चर्चा कर रहे थे तो लोगों को यह समझ में नहीं आ रहा था कि महंगाई का मतलब क्या है, चावल का भाव क्या है, आटे का भाव क्या है, दाल का भाव क्या है और फर्टिलाइजर का भाव क्या है? अभी एक रिपोर्ट आयी कि इस देश में 82 परसेंट किसान मार्जिनल हैं, उन किसानों के पास एक हैक्टेयर से कम भूमि है। इसका मतलब यह है कि वह जो पैदा करते हैं, वे खरीद नहीं पाते हैं, वे बेच नहीं पाते हैं और सरकार कह रही है कि हमने मिनिमम सपोर्ट प्राइज बढ़ा दिया। जिस तरह से पूरी लोक सभा में यह चर्चा होती है कि दस परसेंट व्हाइट कॉलर के लिए, इंडस्ट्रियलिस्ट्स के लिए आप योजना बनाते हैं। आज मैं पूरे सम्मान के साथ कहना चाहता हूं कि 10 परसेंट जो किसान हैं, आप उन्हीं के लिए यह नियम बना रहे हैं। गरीबी और किसान की चर्चा करते हुए आप इन चीजों का ध्यान रखें और अगला बजट बनाते समय इसे देखें कि 82 परसेंट मार्जिनल किसान हैं और उनके पास एक हैक्टेअर से कम जमीन है। एक हैक्टेयर से कम ज़मीन यदि है तो उसके चार आदमी का परिवार क्या खाता होगा, क्या कमाता होगा, क्या बेचता होगा? आप देखें कि मिनिमम सपोर्ट प्राइस क्या है। खाद की कीमत आज क्या है? पिछले साल जो डीएपी 470 रुपये में मिल रहा था, इस बार 770 रुपये में मिल रहा है। पिछले साल आप 650 रुपये सबसिडी दे रहे थे, इस साल 966 रुपये सबसिडी दे रहे हैं। सबसिडी भी बढ़ रही है, डीएपी का दाम भी बढ़ रहा है। आम किसान का क्या होगा, इस पर भी आपको ध्यान देना चाहिए। जिस तरह से इस देश में कोर्ट अपनी सीमा को लांघ रहा है, जिस तरह से मीडिया अपनी सीमा को लांघ रहा है, माननीय शत्रुघ्न जी यहाँ बैठे हैं, एक फिल्म का डायलॉग मुझे याद आता है। फिल्म की कहानी और नाम मुझे नहीं पता है। उसमें कादर खान थे। कादर खान का नाम उसमें दुभाषिया था। वे नेता थे। वे हमेशा दो डिक्टेशन लिखवाकर रखते थे। यदि नेता बाढ़ में ट्रेन से जा रहा हो तो कहते हैं कि नेता ट्रेन से जा रहा है और जनता मर रही है। यदि हैलीकॉप्टर या हवाई जहाज़ से जाते थे तो कहते थे कि जनता मर रही है और इसको कुछ चिन्ता नहीं है, यह हैलीकॉप्टर से चल रहा है। यह जो हालत हो गई है, जिस तरह से मनीष तिवारी जी उस दिन चर्चा कर रहे थे, हम जिस ढंग से कांस्टीटय़ूशनल अथॉरिटी को चैलेन्ज कर रहे हैं, वह हमें चैलेन्ज कर रहा है, इसको रोकने का प्रयास होना चाहिए।
13.16 hrs. (Shrimati Sumitra Mahajan in the Chair) सभापति महोदया, उस दिन जहाँ मेरा भाषण रुका था, उसके आगे का मेरा पॉइंट है कि मैं एसबीआई के संबंध में यह जो संशोधन आया है, भारतीय जनता पार्टी उसका समर्थन करती है और वही सपोर्ट करने के लिए मैं खड़ा हुआ हूँ।
मेरा 17वाँ प्रश्न था कि प्रैफरैन्शियल शेयर और प्राइवेट प्लेसमैंट के बारे में सरकार का क्या रुख है। मेरा 18वाँ प्रश्न था कि जो पैंशन रूल्स एसबीआई ने अमैन्ड किये हैं, ये कब तक लागू हो जाएँगे। मेरा 19वाँ सवाल था कि यह जो मर्जर हुआ है, इसमें जो ब्रांचेज़ हैं, कई बैंकों की ब्रांचेज़ एकदम नज़दीक-नज़दीक हैं। ब्रांचेज़ का क्या करेंगे? यदि एक ही बैंक की ब्रांच अगल-बगल रहेंगी, चूँकि एक ही अथॉरिटी आप दे रहे हैं, तो उस ब्रांच को यदि आप बंद करेंगे तो किस तरह से लोगों का ध्यान रखेंगे?
माननीय सभापति जी, आप इंदौर से सांसद हैं और आप बता रही थीं कि बैंक ऑफ इंदौर को मर्ज करने के समय इंप्लाइज़ के साथ जो-जो वायदे किये थे, जिस तरह से था, उसमें लोगों की छँटनी की गई है। यदि इन ब्रांचेज़ को आप मर्ज करेंगे तो उनका क्या होगा? मेरा 21वाँ सवाल था कि जो सबसीडियरी बैंक का शेयरहोल्डिंग है, उसका स्टेट बैंक पर क्या असर पड़ेगा। जो चेन्ज ऑफ ओनरशिप है, The change of ownership was done in the year 2007 and the amendments to the Act of the Subsidiary Banks are being carried out after three years to make consequential changes. It may be explained during this three-year period whether SBI had administrative problems on the issue indicated in the Background Note in the management of their subsidiaries. वह एक बैकग्राउंड नोट मैनेजमैंट ऑफ सबसीडियरीज़ ने दिया है। If not, the reason to amend the Act at this stage may be explained. अंत में है कि ये सारे जो बैंक हैं, What is the policy of the Government on merger of banks? फाइनली कोई पॉलिसी तो होगी, क्योंकि आप बैंकिंग अमैंडमैंट लॉ लेकर आ रहे हैं, उसमें आप कंपीटीशन कमीशन ऑफ इंडिया से, जिसके लिए आप नया बिल इंट्रोडय़ूस करने वाले हैं, उससे आप सोचते हैं कि बैंकिंग का मर्जर सीसीआई के परव्यू से ऊपर हो जाए, बाहर हो जाए। तो आपके पास क्या ऐसी पॉलिसी है, क्या ऐसी चीज़ें हैं जो आप इस रूल के तहत आगे बढ़ना चाहते हैं? इसके बाद हम स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया पर आ रहे हैं। क्योंकि जो एनपीए है, वह बढ़ रहा है। इंटरस्ट रेट जब आप बढ़ा रहे हैं, आरबीआई का कहना है कि इंटरस्ट रेट बढ़ेगा तो एनपीए होगा। उस दिन बड़ा अच्छा जवाब दे रहे थे। यशवंत सिन्हा जी ने कहा कि 44 बिलियन इंडस्ट्रियलिस्ट्स ने बाहर इनवैस्ट किया है और 17 बिलियन लोगों ने यहाँ इनवैस्ट किया है। आपने कहा कि कोई चीज़ नहीं है, सारी चीज़ें ठीक हैं। लेकिन क्या आपने कभी यह सोचा कि यह जो इतना ग्रोथ देश में हुआ है, वह माननीय अटल बिहारी वाजपेयी की पॉलिसी थी, एनडीए की पॉलिसी थी कि हम इंडस्ट्री के लिए अपने लोन को धीरे-धीरे नीचे लेकर आए थे। सात-आठ परसेंट पर वह लोन मिल रहा था इंडस्ट्री को। आज उसके इंटरस्ट का रेट फिर से 14-15 परसेंट पर चला गया है। इससे क्या हो रहा है कि एनपीए बढ़ रहा है, इससे इंडस्ट्रियलाइज़ेशन का प्रोसैस बंद हो रहा है। आप किसके ऊपर जा रहे हैं कि जो एजुकेशन लोन है, प्रायॉरिटी सैक्टर की लैन्डिंग है, उसको बंद कर दो। आप कह रहे हैं कि हाउसिंग लोन को टाइट कर दो। यह इंटरस्ट बढ़ने से जो एनपीए बढ़ेगा, क्या इसके बारे में सरकार ने कभी सोचा है?
महोदया स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया दो सौ साल पुराना बैंक है। इसकी 12567 ब्रांच हैं। 150 इंटरनैशनल बांच हैं और 155 मिलियन इसके कस्टमर्स हैं। आपको इसका मर्जर कर रहे हैं, लेकिन इसके रिक्स फैक्टर्स कौन से हैं? वर्ष 2008-09 में हम 55वें स्थान पर थे आज स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया की क्या पोजीशन है? रिस्क फैक्टर्स क्या हैं- The bank business is particularly vulnerable in interest rate risk; and the volatility in interest rates could adversely affect its Net Interest Margin. What would happen to the value of its fixed income portfolio, its income from treasury operations and its financial performance? If the bank fails to maintain the desired level of customer deposits or loans, its business operations may be majorly and adversely affected. यदि आपका कस्टमर कम हो जाएगा तो आप क्या करेंगे? The bank has a large portfolio of the Government securities. सरकार का 55 प्रतिशत पोर्टफोलिया है। ..and that may limit its ability to deploy funds into higher yielding investment. आप ज्यादा निवेश नहीं कर पा रहे हैं, यह आपको रोक रहा है, चूंकि सरकारी सिक्योरिटीज़ हैं, इसके बारे में आपका क्या सोचना है? The base rate system is a new method for pricing loans; and its impact on the future result of the bank is unclear. क्या आपने यह सोचा है कि बेस रेट का बैंक पर क्या असर होगा? A substantial portion of the bank’s income is derived from its Government operations, a slowdown in which could adversely affect the bank’s business. अभी माननीय जोशी जी बोल रहे थे कि पूरी दुनिया में स्लोडाउन होगा। जब एसबीआई के ऊपर होगा और आप इसका मर्जर कर रहे हैं, इसका एनपीए बहुत ज्यादा है, इस बारे में आपने क्या सोचा है? If the bank is not able to control, to reduce the level of NPA in its portfolio, whether its business will be adversely affected or not. Further deterioration of the banks NPA portfolio and inability to improve its provisioning coverage as a percentage of gross NPA could adversely affect the price of the bank. यदि एक रीज़न का एनपीए बहुत ज्यादा हो जाएगा तो इस बारे में आपने क्या सोचा है? There was a recent requirement of the Reserve Bank of India that all Indian banks increase their provisioning coverage as a percentage of gross NPAs. Would it adversely affect the bank’s business or not?
श्री सैयद शाहनवाज़ हुसैन (भागलपुर): सभापति महोदया, एक भी कैबिनेट मंत्री सदन में मौजूद नहीं है।
श्री निशिकांत दुबे : महोदया, यह तो प्वाइंट ऑफ आर्डर है कि कोई कैबिनेट मंत्री नहीं है। हम इतनी सीरियस चर्चा कर रहे हैं।...( व्यवधान) जब तक कैबिनेट मंत्री नहीं आएंगे, तब तक मैं नहीं बोलूंगा।...( व्यवधान) हम इतने सीरियस डिफाल्ट्स के बारे में चर्चा कर रहे हैं।...( व्यवधान) यह प्वाइंट ऑफ आर्डर भी है।
सभापति महोदया : इस बिल से संबंधित मंत्री बैठे हैं।
…( व्यवधान)
श्री सैयद शाहनवाज़ हुसैन : महोदया, सरकार यह चर्चा करती है कि वह संसद के प्रति गंभीर है, लेकिन संसद के प्रति सरकार की क्या ज़िम्मेदारी है? क्या सरकार की कोई ज़िम्मेदारी नहीं है? जब हम लोगों की सरकार के समय में कोई कैबिनेट मंत्री नहीं होता था तो ये लोग हल्ला कर देते थे, आज एक कैबिनेट मंत्री नहीं है, जबकि इतने महत्वपूर्ण विषय पर आज चर्चा चल रही है।...( व्यवधान)
रूलिंग पार्टी के लोग गंभीर नहीं है। इतने महत्वपूर्ण विषय पर माननीय सदस्य इतनी तैयारी के साथ आए हैं, लेकिन कोई सुनने को तैयार नहीं है। रूलिंग पार्टी कहती है कि संसद नहीं चल रही है। जब संसद चलती है तो मंत्री लोग गायब हो जाते हैं।...( व्यवधान)
सभापति महोदया : मंत्री महोदय आ गए हैं। अब शुरू करें। आप अच्छी तरह से अपनी बात रख रहे हैं।
श्री निशिकांत दुबे : सभापति महोदया, मैं माननीय श्री पवन कुमार बंसल साहब का बहुत सम्मान करता हूं। इनका बयान आज सुबह-सुबह पढ़ा कि विपक्ष इस बिल को पास कराने में इंटेरेस्टेड नहीं है और हम किसी तरह से बिल पास कराएंगे। मैं इनको कह रहा हूं कि मैं बिल पास कराऊंगा। इनकी ट्रेजरी बेंच कहां हैं, इनको ध्यान देना चाहिए।
सभापति महोदयाः मंत्री महोदय ध्यान दे देंगे। वे इसे नोट कर लेंगे।
श्री निशिकांत दुबे : मेरा अगला सवाल है कि The bank may experience delays in enforcing its collateral when borrowers default on their obligations to the bank, which may result in failure to recover the expected value of collateral security, exposing it to a potential loss. यह कोल्लेटरल सिक्यूरिटी के बारे में भारतीय स्टेट बैंक ने कोई चर्चा की है या सरकार ने की है या नहीं? The Indian bank industry is very competitive and the bank’s growth strategy depends on its ability to compete effectively. मैंने पहले कहा हम वर्ष 2008-09 में 55वें नम्बर पर थे, आज 100 से भी ज्यादा पार कर गए हैं। क्या यह कम्पीटिशन हम इफेक्टीवली कर पा रहे हैं? क्या भारतीय स्टेट बैंक उसको कर पा रही है? The bank is subject to credit, market and liquidity risk which may have an adverse effect on its credit ratings and its cost of funds. कॉस्ट ऑफ फंड या क्रेडिट रेटिंग के बारे में क्या भारतीय स्टेट बैंक ने कोई बात रखी है या सोची है? क्या सरकार के बारे में बात हुई है? इसके बाद मुद्दा है कंसेंट्रेशन ऑफ लोन्स। सभापति महोदया, आज के इस डिप्रेसिएशन में यह सबसे बड़ा सवाल है जो आज अमेरिका या यूरोप में हो रहा है। The bank has high concentration of loans to certain customers and to certain sectors and if a substantial portion of these loans were to become non-performing, the quality of its loan portfolio could be adversely affected. इनका ट्रेडिंग किस-किसमें है? गैर बैंकिंग वित्तीय कंपनियों में, इंफ्रास्ट्रक्चर में, आयरन एण्ड स्टील में, पेट्रोलियम में, और इंजीनियरिंग में इनकी ट्रेडिंग है। इनका हाई कंसेंट्रेशन इसी में है। वह लगभग 2633 बिलियन है और यह 48.4 प्रतिशत है। इसके बारे में बैंक ने क्या सोचा है? A substantial portion of the bank’s loan have a tenure exceeding one year, exposing the bank to risks associated with economic cycle and project success rate. क्या इसके बारे में बैंक ने कुछ सोचा है? The bank’s funding is primarily short-term. If depositors do not roll over deposited funds, upon maturity could the bank’s business be adversely affected or not? Short-term or long-term. शॉर्ट टर्म और लौंग टर्म में शॉर्ट टर्म में ज्यादा है। यदि हम उनको सही समय पर मैच्यूरिटी नहीं देंगे तो क्या होगा, क्या इसके बारे में बैंक ने सोचा है? The bank is exposed to fluctuation in foreign exchange rate. जो अभी मार्केट की इकॉनोमी चल रही है, जिस तरह से तेल के भी दाम ऊपर-नीचे हो रहे हैं, इसके बारे में आपने क्या सोचा है? आप दाम घटा रहे हैं या नहीं? आप जब दाम बढ़ाते हैं तो 10 रूपया ले रहे हैं। The bank may not be able to detect money laundering. आज मनी लॉन्ड्रिंग और ब्लैक मनी बहुत बड़ा मुद्दा है। The bank may not be able to detect money laundering and other illegal or improper activities fully on a timely basis which could expose it to the additional liability and harm its business or reputation. महोदया, अभी हमने आई.पी.एल. की जांच की थी और उसमें अचानक बिना आर.बी.आई. के आदेश के बैंक एकाउन्ट खुल गया तो मनी लॉन्ड्रिंग के बारे में भारतीय स्टेट बैंक ने क्या सोचा है? Could significant security breaches adversely impact the bank’s business or not? Could regulatory changes in India or other jurisdiction in which the bank operates adversely affect its business or not? जब आपकी इच्छा होती है, आप सी.आर.आर., रेपो रेट, और बेसिस प्वायंट बढ़ाते-घटाते हैं?
इसका इंटरनेशनल मार्केट में क्या इम्पेक्ट होगा? आपकी जो 150 ब्रांचेज़ हैं, उनका क्या होगा?
The bank is required to maintain its capital adequacy ratio at the minimum level required by the RBI for domestic banks. There can be no insurance that the bank will be able to access capital as and when it needs for growth. क्या बैंक को हम इस तरह से कोई पोटेंशियल, लिवरेज देने वाले हैं।
As the bank’s majority shareholder, the Government controls the bank and may cause the bank to take action, which are not in the interest of the bank and the holders of the bank. आपने सरकार के ऊपर जो इतनी डिपेंडेबिल्टी दे दी है, उसमें आप कितनी ऑथोरिटी बैंक को देना चाहते हैं, क्योंकि 59, 60 परसैंट आपकी शेयर होल्डिंग है।
If the bank does not effectively manage its foreign operation, this operation may incur losses or otherwise adversely affect the bank’s business and result of operation. इसका क्या होगा?
The bank may not be successful in implementing its growth strategy on penetrating new markets. ये हमारा कंसर्न है कि हम जो नयी मार्केट और नयी चीजों में जाना चाहते हैं, उसमें बैंक के पास कोई विज़न नहीं है। इसके बारे में क्या है।
If the bank is not able to integrate any future acquisition, the bank’s business would be disrupted or not. If the bank is unable to adapt to rapid technological changes, its business could suffer or not. क्योंकि टैक्नोलॉजी बहुत जल्दी साल-साल, दो-दो साल में हो रही है, उसके बारे में स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया ने कुछ सोचा है या नहीं सोचा है।
सभापति महोदया : निशिकांत जी, आप बहुत अच्छा बोल रहे हैं, लेकिन थोड़ा समय का ध्यान रखिए।
SHRI NISHIKANT DUBEY : The bank’s remuneration scheme may not be as attractive as of other banks with which it competes and may hurt the bank’s ability to attract and maintain a skilled and committed workforce. लोग प्राइवेट बैंक की तरफ जाने के लिए ज्यादा इच्छुक हैं, क्योंकि उन्हें लगता है कि सरकारी बैंक इस तरह की सेवा देने में परेशान हैं, अक्षम है। आपने जो बात कही, उसमें यह है। The bank may not be able to properly manage and gradually reduce its number of employees which would negatively impact its business. इसके आधार पर वे क्या कर रहे हैं कि पुराने जो स्टेट बैंक के एम्लाइ हैं, उन्हें कंटीन्यू कर रहे हैं, लेकिन ये जो सब्सिडरी को अपने साथ जोड़ रहे हैं, उनको उसके आधार पर कर रहे हैं। उस वर्क फोर्स के बारे में आप क्या सोच रहे हैं? बैंक के पास कंटीजेंट लायबिल्टी है। इसके बारे में बैंक क्या सोच रहा है?
Increased volatility or inflation of commodity prices in India could adversely affect the bank’s business ये जो इनफ्लेशन है, इसके कारण बैंक का जो बिज़नैस डाउन होगा, इसके बारे में बैंक ने क्या सोचा है?
And, a significant increase in the price of crude oil could adversely affect the Indian economy and the bank’s business. कई चीजें हैं, मैं उन पर बहुत ज्यादा जाना नहीं चाहता, क्योंकि इस बिल का हम सपोर्ट कर रहे हैं। मेरा केवल यह कहना है, गीता में एक श्लोक है - “समो दमस्तप: शौचं शांति राजर्मवेव च, ज्ञान-विज्ञान मास्तिक्यं ब्रह्मकर्म स्वभावजम्।” हमें जो ये मौका मिला है, ये अंत:करण को शुद्ध करने का मौका मिला है, इंद्रियों को ठीक करने का, धर्म का पालन करने का, बाहर-भीतर शुद्ध करने का, आम गरीबों एवं जनता का साथ देने का, उनके लिए कुछ काम करने का और हमारा जो परसेप्शन जा रहा है, जिसके आधार पर विरोध हो रहा है, एम्प्लाइज़ लोग विरोध कर रहे थे। रामायण की एक छोटी-सी पंक्ति कह कर मैं अपनी बात खत्म करूंगा। जब राम और लक्ष्मण सीता हरण के बाद एक तालाब के किनारे जाते हैं और वहां उनको बगुला दिखाई देता है। वह बड़े धीरे-धीरे तालाब में विचरण कर रहा है तो राम अपने भाई से कहते हैं कि देखो, ये कितना शुद्ध बगुला है। ये चाहता है कि मेरे पैर से कोई जीव मर न जाए, इसलिए धीरे-धीरे चलता है। वे जिस पहाड़ पर, तालाब के किनारे जिस पत्थर पर बैठे हुए थे, उधर से मेंढक चिल्लाता है, वह कहता है कि आप बाहर से देख रहे हो। मैं उससे डर कर छिपा बैठा हूं और वह मुझे ढूंढ रहा है। मेरे पूरे परिवार का उसने खात्मा कर दिया है। इसलिए जो परसेप्शन है, वह यह है कि आप किस चीज से उसे देखना चाहते हैं। परसेप्शन यह जा रहा है कि रिफार्म्स गरीबी, भ्रष्टाचार ला रहा है, यह आम आदमी से जुड़ा हुआ नहीं है।।
इस परसैप्शन को खत्म करिये। हम आपका साथ देंगे।
इन्हीं शब्दों के साथ मैं अपनी बात खत्म करता हूं। जयहिन्द-जय भारत।
सभापति महोदया : धन्यवाद। आपने बहुत अच्छे पाइंट्स रखे हैं।
DR. K.S. RAO (ELURU): Madam, as far as the Bill is concerned, I do not find many clauses where we need to discuss for a long time because it is a very simple Bill – just transferring the ownership. At one time the ownership rested with the Reserve Bank of India; now it is being changed to the Government of India. Naturally, in the clauses wherever earlier the Reserve Bank was empowered as the owner, now we are empowering the Government of India, particularly in regard to increasing the authorized capital, fixation of issued capital to subsidiaries, preferential capital, bonus, authority in appointing the Chairman and Managing Director, similarly in cases of misdeed, supersession of the Board, removal of Directors wherever found necessary, and above all, making of rules and regulations. I do not think much needs to be said about clauses and the Bill which everyone of us will automatically support. This could have been done even earlier.
In this context, I wish to express some of my opinions in regard to improving the banking and economy of this country. At the time of independence when there was no corporate sector in India, and when we were depending on outside investors, it had become a necessity for the Banks to finance the public sector undertakings more particularly and also the corporate sector which came forward. Much of the money used to go only to those corporate sector and the rich people who were investing in industry and trade. But, today the situation is changed. A situation has come where our corporate sector is in a position not only to invest in this country, but also to go to other countries, including America and Europe and invest there. So, my humble suggestion to the hon. Finance Minister is to please think in terms of reducing the lending to high corporate sector where they have got crores and crores of rupees with them. So, we should not utilize the public money of about Rs.43 lakh crore lying in the shape of deposits in Banks for the purpose of lending to the rich man, lending once again to multi millionaires. The same money can be given to the poorer sections of society which they can utilize well not only for improving their livelihood, but also to add to the wealth of the nation. Please think on the point whether we can put an end to financing from banks to the major industrial sector which is very successful, particularly the profit making corporate sector. We can divert a lot of funds to the fresh investors and professionals, people who have got some research and development done, and who have got innovate ideas. They can be helped if they have no money, but if they have got bright ideas with substantial evidence of success for the projects which they think of.
We have also seen and the statistics reveal that much of the exports are being done by small and medium enterprises; so we can encourage that. Similarly, in regard to financing the priority sector, we were allocating only about 40 per cent of the total lendable deposits. This is done decades back at a time when the corporate sector was not developed. But, today, with 70 per cent of people living in villages and 58 per cent of the people living on agriculture, it is time for us to increase this ratio of allocating 40 per cent to the priority sector to at least 60 per cent, so that money would be available to the small scale sector as well as the agricultural sector and professionals among poorer sections of society.
We find -- whenever we go in the Committee Meetings of the Parliament -- that a lot of banks are not even fulfilling that 40 per cent or 18 per cent agricultural financing. So, I wish that the Government must take a serious note to think about increasing the priority sector lending from 40 per cent to 60 per cent, so that we will take care of the real need of the poorer sections and we will replan the economy of this country, which is mostly agro-economy today.
As regards micro-finance, we hear a lot of things, particularly, in Andhra Pradesh that some of these micro-finance companies have been charging about 50-60 per cent from the poorer sections of the society. Where did they get that money? It is not their own money. Some of the banks, which find that the transaction cost is more for them, are giving crores and crores of rupees to the micro-finance companies. This should have been given under priority sector by the main banks at a lower rate of interest of 9 per cent or sometimes 10 per cent to the users. They are transferring it to the micro-finance companies as if they are going to do priority sector lending. I can understand if those people were to come with non-profit motive, but even those micro-finance private companies are profit-motivated. Hence, they are squeezing interest from the poorer sections of the society. So, I wish the Government to take note of the fact that no major banks should lend priority sector funds to the micro-finance companies. It must be done by them only or it should be given to an institution, which is non-profit making.
We have got lot of charitable institutions in this country who think of doing service to the poorer sections of the society, and if they do not find major charitable institutions in this country -- who lend to the poorer sections of the society -- in the rural areas, then we have got new avenues now, particularly, the women Self-Help Groups (SHGs) in this country, who are utilising these funds excellently well. We can see the glow on the faces of women in the villages where they earn Rs. 3,000 in a month as it is big money for them, which they were not able to get earlier. So, these SHGs can be encouraged in a big way, and the same money can be transferred to the SHGs where the transaction cost also will be very minimal. So, I wish that the Government seriously thinks about it, and there should not be a loss of time in this regard, namely, in curbing the micro-finance corporations to be given money from the banks. It is public money, and the same thing can be passed on directly to the SHGs who will pass it on to the colleagues who are poor.
Similarly, majority of the private sector banks, by virtue of their opening the branch only in urban areas where the transactions are very substantial that is, running into millions and crores, they do not have the commitment to lend to the poorer sections of the society in the villages. So, they do not open branches in the rural areas. It means that there is no level-playing field between the public sector banks and the private sector banks. There must be level-playing field, and the same guidelines must be applied and strictly enforced. The private sector banks are mainly avoiding this stipulation of priority sector lending by transferring this money to the micro-finance institutions, which is doing tremendous amount of harm to the poorer sections of the society.
Right from 1985, I am telling in this House that the role of the banks is excellent. If we were to provide Rs. 10 lakh crore in the Budget, then the banks can do more good to the society and to the economy of this country than the budgetary provisions. It is because we will make the budgetary provisions only once, but the banks can lend to a borrower and recycle it 10 times. It means that if they were to identify the right borrower and that too a small borrower for the Rs. 43 lakh crore that is lying with the banks, then all that they need is a vegetable vendor. If he gets Rs. 2,000 loan, then in two days he will recycle it; pay it back; and then take it.
In that Rs. 2,000, he will make his livelihood; he can at least earn between Rs. 200 to Rs. 300 minimum, if not more. So, who is going to give them better dividend? Who is going to create more wealth in this country? It is the poor man or it is the common man who is going to do that. Unless they do some mischief, no major company can afford to make that much return. I wish that these banks must identify the right borrowers, more particularly in the rural areas, so that their wealth, their living standards will go up, while at the same time increasing the wealth of the nation, the GDP of the nation.
In that regard, if the Government were to give the target that this priority sector lending must be done amounting to so many crores, then they will immediately catch the voters’ list and prepare the names of the borrowers. That should not be the case. When priority lending is done, all those borrowers must be identified, must be trained in a profession where they are interested, and then only the lending must be linked to them. In such a manner, all that money that is given to them can be put to extensive use and the returns will be more. By merely saying that we have given so many thousands of crores of rupees to the poorer sections of the society who are not connected will be of no use.
In this context, I suppose I told this earlier also, I will give an example to my colleague. I am running a Charitable Trust since 1985 providing skills in various professions totally free. In my constituency, when my people approached some Muslim families requesting them to send their women for training or for learning some skills, they refused to send their women. They said that it was a matter of ‘Izzat or Izzat ki baat’ and, therefore, they would not send their women and that they were ready to starve but would not send their women outside for learning the skills. When my people convinced them, they ultimately agreed to send their women provided they were trained separately in a different room. We agreed for it, and some of them learnt making phenyl. At the end, when they were fully trained, I called the Collector of the District to give the certificates to the trainees.
Then, the Collector, who happens to be a woman, in a random and not specific manner, asked a Muslim woman in what profession she was trained. The Muslim woman replied by saying that she was trained in making phenyl. The Collector asked her whether she was confident of making this phenyl on her own without support from anybody, to which she replied ‘yes’. When she was asked whether she could earn money out of it, she replied by saying ‘yes’. When she was further asked as to why she was not doing it in her own house, she replied by saying that she did not have money and she had no investment. When it was enquired from her as to how much money was required by her – had it been party workers or regular followers of any political party, they would have said that they would require a minimum of one lakh rupees for making phenyl – shockingly, this Muslim woman who learnt making phenyl said that she would require Rs. 150. When the Collector asked her how much money she would make out of it, she replied that she would easily make Rs. 100 every day. That was the condition prevailing in those areas.
In these cases, we need to take the lead and see what kind of policies are to be formulated by the Government in power. We must decide that here. This is the highest policy making body; every law, every Act, every programme and every policy we make must be able to motivate the people and must give them the ability and resources to make wealth for this nation. By simply giving a lecture, by creating the right policy, programme or Act, it is not going to happen. I wish the hon. Minister and the Government in particular will take note of this situation prevailing in the villages and then see that more and more money is given to the poorer sections of the society than to the richer sections.
Madam, in this respect, I just wanted to say a few more things.
We should encourage competition even in private banks. I am not against private banks. But they should not be given separate privileges. Private banks are starting their branches only in Delhi, Hyderabad or Bombay. It is not the right thing. Today when 70 per cent of the people are living in other areas, we must also go. That means, banks should not only think that it is only for profit-making. There must be a social responsibility also in it. While earning money, they must think that they are the trustees of the property. Let them enjoy the benefit. We are not coming on their way. But it should not be solely the profit making one. How does it gain to them except satisfying their ego that they make a lakh of crore of rupees or they make ten lakh crore of money? What do they do after that? I wish that the policy also should be changed in this regard.
While doing so, the people who come prepared to start a bank, should not depend on our deposit. They must have their own money and substantial shares. The limits also can be increased. Earlier, if I remember aright, for opening a bank, a capital of Rs.100 crore or Rs.200 crore was required initially. But it can be made Rs.500 crore or Rs.1,000 crore. Then there will be safety for the banks also.
Above all, I am also fighting right from the beginning that the rate of interest being charged in this country is killing the economy of this country and more particularly the human values are coming down. The sweat of the human beings is not valued properly. If I have, say, a crore of rupees, even if I sit in my house and lend this money, I get Rs.50 lakhs every year. So, why should I strain myself? Why should I work hard? But if it were to be on the hard work turned out by a citizen and not by the interest rate and suppose I do not get 15 per cent rate of interest but two per cent rate of interest, that will not be sufficient for me. Then I will have to work hard. I will work hard, sweat and then create wealth in this nation. So money should not create wealth but sweat should create the wealth. It is possible only when you reduce the rate of interest in this country. I do not know how the policy makers are thinking that by increasing the rate of interest they can control the circulation of money in this country and by which they can reduce the prices. That is not the only solution for the country. I request the Brain Trust of this country, particularly engaged in financial matters to please rethink and understand the situation in this country. Why is America charging only two per cent interest? Why is the inflation there only three per cent? Why is the same thing continuing in Europe? What is the principle of the financial system in Muslim community? They do not charge any interest. If somebody gets profit, let the banks share. In this regard, I also request the hon. Minister to make note that all those companies which are taking finance from the banks, which are making windfall of profits, they must also share some of the profits, if not full, with the banks. If a major company makes profit of an investment of say Rs.100 crore, with Rs.50 crore taken from the bank, which is a public money and if he makes a profit of Rs.50 crore every year, why should he be allowed full profit? I do agree that they are paying interest to the banks. But it is only eight per cent or ten per cent while they are getting hundred per cent margin on their own investment. I do not say that this must be applied to every company. But at least those companies which are getting a windfall of profit, that must be shared. We must bring a legislation in this House to that extent.
In this regard I also say that no lending must be made to speculative business. I understand that in Delhi, Prithviraj Road or Jor Bagh, the land cost today is Rs.10 to Rs.12 lakhs per yard. It is horrible. How can anybody imagine that he can have even ten square yards for his housing?
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB (CUTTACK): How much is the cost at Banjara Hills?
DR. K.S. RAO : It is throughout the country. My point is that public money should not be given to any speculative business like real estate or even future trading or any markets or none of these things.
If they want to make money, let them make money. In that case, the prices of these things will not go beyond the reach of the persons, more particularly, the poor men. Can any poor person think of having even 10 yards, not necessarily in Prithviraj Road, but in the outskirts of this city? He cannot, unless the Govt. does it. That is why, I have been fighting – keeping all these things in mind – for the minimum requirement of the citizens in this country, the poor men – be it keeping the food grains at an affordable price, or shelter. They should be given by the Government. Similarly, good education or health care, etc. must be taken care of by the Government.
Over and above that, if a poor man wants to come up, he must work hard and compete with others, and then, make money. Unless he has that basic requirement, he will not have an opportunity to come up, not now, but even for hundreds and thousands of years to come.
I just wanted to say in this regard – criticism will always be there – if a particular company were to be successful for a period of 2-3-4 decades, and by any chance, if it were to lose in a particular year, the banks must be able to go to the rescue and see that it is revived because the money belongs to the people. If the banks do not go to the rescue, the company which is 40-50 years old, would get killed; it is nothing but killing of a human being. So, I wish that there must be a rationality, a vision and a thinking on the part of the banking system to go to the rescue and save such companies which are established – be it individual also.
Intentionally and with a fraud-making-mind, it should not be done. But if it were to be genuine, it must be done. In that regard, there must be an assurance from the Government and from the higher authorities that if a genuine mistake is committed, there is no harm and that there would be no punishment. But if an intentional mistake were to be committed, he must be immediately punished. But the system in this country is such that – be it judiciary or inquiry system like vigilance – the decision on the cases take years. If some officer were to make an intentional fraud and if a Departmental investigation were to be conducted, it will not be decided for 10 years; even if he goes to the court, it will not be decided. That means, his courage to commit fraud is increasing. That is why, I want my colleague-Ministers to bring such legislations in this country which would create a fear in the minds of the people who are committing offences. The law should be very stringent that a person who commits fraud, he would not be spared for his fraud.
Today, everyone thinks that he could commit a murder and hoodwink the law; everyone thinks that he could make Rs.1000 crore overnight and hoodwink the law. If this were to be the way, we cannot check it in the name of democracy; we can give freedom, but democracy does not mean that anybody can do any fraud or offence and get away. In the name of democracy, we should not spoil the growth of this country. I wish that we must think in these lines – what kind of legislation that should be brought forward and how stringent it should be.
It is known to everyone of us that red-tapism is one which is costing the economy very badly. If a decision that could be taken in a day is delayed by a month, the loss is substantial. A product that can be produced in Rs.100 could cost Rs.200 in that case. Who is responsible for that? In this context, I wish to say once again to the Government – I heard that if an American or an European were to go for an investment in China, they would not allow them to come back for a second time. They will decide the matter across the table and he is forced to invest there. The same is not the case in India. If a multinational wants to come and invest in India, it takes months and years for him to come to a conclusion.
So, I wish that there must be a system. I am happy that there is a committee to decide on the FDI issue, but that also should not take too much time. Let them judge properly. If they want, let them have experts in that committee, who can decide the matter – he could take the history of the investor and see whether he is a genuine investor or whether he is capable or not. They can be taken care of in that way.
14.00 hrs. In this context, whenever the Government or the Reserve Bank thinks in terms of increasing or decreasing the interest rate, I wish that at least the farming community, poorer sections of the society and self-help groups must be given loan at less than 3 per cent of interest. As far as I am concerned, I wish that some time they may be given loan without interest also. Otherwise, the interest amount will cripple them. For generations they have already suffered because of high interest rates. Nehru Ji must have brought the public sector undertakings with a view that the profits made by them may be shared by not just one family but by more number of people. But he could not have imagined that a day will come when the public sector undertakings instead of distributing profit will distribute losses to the public. I wish no public sector undertaking should incur loss. As I was telling the other day, be it Air India or some other organisation, if it is incurring losses regularly we should put an end to it. Just like the private sector undertakings, we can have all the guidelines and regulate the public sector undertakings strictly. So, we can control it. How long can we go on providing budgetary support to all these loss-making public sector undertakings in a perennial manner? We cannot. So, let us also think in terms of brining legislation in this regard.
I am of the opinion that no budgetary allocation should be made to some of the revenue generating Ministries, for example, Civil Aviation. We have already given at least Rs.50,000 crore to Rs.60,000 crore to them. Should they not earn profit? Should we provide for their loss making every year? Similar is the case with Railway and Petroleum Ministries. I wish that any revenue that is collected in this country should be utilised for the welfare schemes like education, health care and rural development.
So, I would request all the hon. members of this House to give a thought to these matters. The Government also should take note of these things and accordingly change its thinking and follow a new system where the strength of a large number of people living in rural areas, the poorer sections of the society, goes up and they start generating wealth for the country.
श्री शैलेन्द्र कुमार (कौशाम्बी):महोदया, आपने मुझे भारतीय स्टेट बैंक (समनुषंगी बैंक विधि) संशोधन विधेयक, 2009 पर बोलने का अवसर दिया है, इसके लिए मैं आपके प्रति आभार व्यक्त करता हूं।
सभापति महोदया, जहां तक देखा जाए, आज पूरे देश में 20 राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक हैं और 22 निजी बैंक हैं और कोशिश हमारी यह होनी चाहिए कि जो कस्टमर्स हैं, उनको बेहतर सुविधा मिल सके। साथ ही साथ, इस विधेयक में कहा गया है कि बैंकिंग क्षेत्र से जुड़े विभिन्न कानूनों में संशोधन करने के प्रावधान वाले इस संशोधन विधेयक के अमल में आने के बाद आरबीआई एवं बैंकों की शक्तियां बढ़ेंगी। यह देखा गया है कि बैंक की जो पूंजी है, उसको बाजार में कारोबारी गतिविधियों में बढ़ाने से हम ज्यादा पूंजी जुटा पाएंगे। यह हमेशा प्रयास रहा है।
14.04 hrs. (Shri Inder Singh Namdhari in the Chair) लेकिन दूसरी तरफ सार्वजनिक क्षेत्र कें बैंकों की कर्ज में फंसी राशि अर्थात एनपीए बढ़ना भी एक चिंता का विषय है। इसमें कोशिश करनी चाहिए कि केन्द्र सरकार या बैंक की ओर से ऐसी स्कीम्स आएं, जिनसे एनपीए बढ़ने की चिंता कम हो सके। इसके लिए भी प्रयास सरकार को करना चाहिए।
इसमें ज्यादातर स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया, इंडियन ओवरसीज बैंक और आईडीबीआई का सबसे ज्यादा पैसा फंसा हुआ है। केन्द्र सरकार को और वित्त मंत्रालय को प्रयास करना चाहिए कि हमारी जो पूंजी फंसी हुई है, उसे कैसे कम किया जाए।
वर्तमान वित्त वर्ष में सरकार ने लक्ष्य रखा था कि बैंकिंग सुविधा 43,000 गांवों तक पहुंचाएंगे और बैंकों ने भी भरोसा दिलाया था। लेकिन इस लक्ष्य को अभी तक पूरा नहीं कर पाए हैं। वित्त मंत्री जी ने अपने बजट में और विभिन्न अवसरों पर यह कहा कि दो हजार की आबादी वाले गांवों में 2012 तक बैंकिंग सेवाएं प्रदान कर दी जाएंगी। इसके लिए हमें काफी प्रयास करना होगा। वित्त मंत्री जी ने जो यह भरोसा दिलाया था तो तमाम बैंकों को इस उपलब्धि को हासिल करने के लिए प्रयास करना होगा। यह भी लक्ष्य रखा गया था कि दो हजार आबादी वाले ऐसे 73,000 गांवों की पहचान की गई है, जहां बैंकिंग सेवा प्रदान की जानी है। पिछले वित्त वर्ष में इस तरह के दो हजार की आबादी वाले 29,000 गांवों में बैंकिंग सेवा प्रदान की गई थी, लेकिन शेष लक्ष्य अभी तक हम प्राप्त नहीं कर पाए हैं।
इसके अलावा 4,75,000 करोड़ रुपए के कृषि ऋण का लक्ष्य हासिल करने का भरोसा दिया गया है। उस तक भी हम अभी तक नहीं पहुंच पाए हैं और काफी पीछे हैं। अभी बात हो रही थी और मैं सुन रहा था कि शिक्षा के ऋण में कमी आई है, हमने सोचा था कि वृद्धि होगी। हमारे जो तमाम बैंकों में खाते हैं, उनकी राशि में वृद्धि हुई है और 43,000 करोड़ रुपए का बकाया है। दूसरी तरफ अल्पसंख्यकों के उत्थान के लिए बैंकों से कर्ज उपलब्ध कराने के जो लक्ष्य निर्धारित किए गए थे, उन्हें पूरा नहीं किया गया है। जबकि बैंकों को इस प्रकार के निर्देश भारत सरकार के वित्त मंत्रालय ने दिए हैं।
देश में आज भी शिक्षा, चिकित्सा सबको मिले, सबको रोजगार, छत और भोजन मिले, सबसे बुनियादी जरूरतें हैं। हमारी कोशिश होनी चाहिए कि सरकार इन सुविधाओं को मुहैया कराने के लिए कारपोरेट घरानों के साथ ही साथ बैंकों को भी आगे लाना चाहिए और उन्हें भी साथ लेकर इन सुविधाओं को मुहैया कराना चाहिए।
भारत में सिर्फ 34 प्रतिशत जनसंख्या आधिकारिक बैंकों के दायरे में है। अभी भी 15 करोड़ परिवार बैंकिंग सेवा से वंचित हैं। जो हमारा लक्ष्य है, उस तक हम नहीं पहुंच रहे हैं। आज भी 50 प्रतिशत लोगों के पास बैंक का खाता नहीं है। दूर-दराज के गांवों में 17 प्रतिशत लोग बैंकिंग सेवाओं का लाभ उठा रहे हैं, जबकि भारत सरकार की तमाम योजनाएं जैसे मनरेगा आदि जिनमें बैंकों में अकाउंट खोलकर लाभार्थी को पैसा देने की व्यवस्था है। देखा जाए तो इसमें अभी भी जागरूरकता की कमी है। ग्रामीण क्षेत्रों में 75 फीसदी लोग रहते हैं, जो अधिकांश खेतिहर मजदूर हैं, किसान हैं, उन्हें बैंकों के बारे में कम मालूम है। वे अगर बैंक में जाते भी हैं तो उन्हें बड़ी दिक्कतों का सामना करना पड़ता है। हमारा लक्ष्य है कि बैंकिंग सेवा का विस्तार हो और ग्रामीण स्तर पर ज्यादा हो। इसके लिए हमें सरलीकरण की आवश्यकता है, जिससे ज्यादा से ज्यादा लोग बैंकिंग सेवा के दायरे में आ सकें। अभी छः लाख गांवों में सिर्फ 50 प्रतिशत ही बैंकिंग दायरे में हैं। देश की आबादी 125 करोड़ है, लेकिन सिर्फ दस प्रतिशत ही लोग जीवन बीमा के दायरे में आते हैं और 9.6 प्रतिशत लोग अन्य बीमा संस्थाओं का लाभ उठा रहे हैं। हमारा प्रयास होना चाहिए कि हम तमाम ऐसी बैंकिंग सेवाओं को सुदृढ़ बनाएं, उनका विस्तार करें और उन्हें मजबूती प्रदान करें। देश की अर्थव्यवस्था ऐसी होनी चाहिए कि देश का विकास हो, लोगों का विकास हो। आज जो अपराध बढ़े हैं, उसका मुख्य कारण यह भी है कि लोगों के पास धन है, ज्यादातर उसे वह घरों में ही संचय करते हैं।
वह बैंक तक नहीं जा पाता है और अगर बैंक में उसे खाता भी खुलवाना पड़ता है तो उसे बहुत दिक्कतों का सामना करना पड़ता है। आने वाले समय में अगर आपने बाहर के बैंकों को यहां आने के लिए प्रोत्साहित किया है तो प्रतिस्पर्धा पढ़ेगी और बेहतर सुविधा में अपने ग्राहकों को देनी पड़ेगी। इन बातों को सरकार और वित्त मंत्रालय को ध्यान में रखना होगा। मैं ज्यादा न कुछ कहते हुए, इस बिल पर बल देते हुए अपनी बात समाप्त करता हूं।
श्री गोरखनाथ पाण्डेय (भदोही): माननीय सभापति महोदय, आपने मुझे इस संशोधन विधेयक पर बोलने का अवसर दिया, मैं आपका आभारी हूं।
महोदय, देश का विकास बैंकों पर निर्भर होता है और आज बैंक सबसे विश्वसनीय संस्था है। गांव का किसान हो, मजदूर हो, मध्यम वर्ग का व्यक्ति हो या कोई पूंजीपति हो, सबका सीधा संबंध बैंकों से हुआ करता है। बैंक की दो विधा हैं, एक तो पूंजी को व्यवस्थित करना और दूसरा उधार देना। लेकिन बड़े दुख के साथ कहना पड़ता है कि इस सदन में जब माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी अपने आंकड़े इस वित्तीय वर्ष में, बजट पर प्रस्तुत कर रहे थे तो उन्होंने कई बातें रखते हुए बड़े विश्वास के साथ कहा था कि बैंक का संबंध आकार से नहीं प्रदर्शन से होना चाहिए। उसे लोगों की सुविधाओं से नवाजा जाए, यह बैंक का उद्देश्य होना चाहिए। जैसा कि हमारे सम्माननीय सदस्य ने कहा कि इस समय वर्तमान वित्त वर्ष में 45,000 गांवों को बैंकिंग सुविधा प्रदान करने की योजना बनाई गयी और यह भी कहा गया कि देश में जिन गांवों की आबादी 2,000 या अधिक होगी, उन्हें बैंकिंग सुविधाओं से जोड़ा जाएगा।
वर्ष 2012 तक का लक्ष्य रखा गया था कि हम 73,000 गांवों को बैंकिंग सुविधाओं से जोड़ देंगे। सुदूर अंचल में बैठा वह ग्रामीण जब छोटे-मोटे लोन लेने के लिए बैंक में जाता है तो उसे बहुत कठिनाइयों का सामना करना पड़ता है और वह अपना खाता नहीं खुलवा पाता है। अगर खाता खुलवा भी लेता है तो लोन की प्रक्रिया इतनी जटिल है कि उसमें भी बिचौलियों की जरूरत पड़ती है। अगर बिचौलिये हैं तो लोन की व्यवस्था हो जाती है अन्यथा नहीं। अगर पूंजीपति है, धन्नासेठ है तो उनकी व्यवस्था ऑटोमेटिक है, उन्हें बैंक दिल-खोलकर सहयोग देता है। उनकी अट्टालिकाएं बढ़ती जा रही हैं लेकिन गरीब की झोंपड़ी छोटी होती जा रही है। आज इस देश में जरूरत है कि सुदूर गांव में बैठे हुए लोगों का विकास हो और बैंकिंग सुविधाओं को देने का सरकार का जो लक्ष्य है कि हम गांवों के मजदूर और गरीबों का उत्थान करेंगे, वह पूरा हो। अनेक लाभकारी योजनाएं उनके लिए बनाई गयी हैं और ऐसा भी बताया गया कि बैंक उन छोटे लोगों को बिना किसी धरोहर रखे, ब्याज मुक्त ऋण प्रदान करें। हम लोग गांव में रहते हैं, लोग आते हैं और हम लोगों से पूछते हैं और जब हम लोग बात करते हैं तो पता चलता है कि ये योजनाएं कागजों पर हैं और उन्हें इन योजनाओं से अवगत नहीं कराया गया है और अगर उन्हें जानकारी भी हुई तो उन बैंकों के मैनेजर्स गांवों के लोगों के साथ सहयोग नहीं करते हैं जोकि उन्हें करना चाहिए।
मैं बड़े अफसोस के साथ कहना चाहता हूं कि आज भी 72 प्रतिशत से ज्यादा लोग गांव में रहते हैं। गांव की गरीबी, गांव की बदहाली, गांव की मजबूरी इस देश की सच्ची कहानी कहती है, सच्ची तस्वीर बताती है। हम विकसित राष्ट्र बनना चाहते हैं, हम सब्जबाग दिखाना चाहते हैं लेकिन आज अमरीका की तस्वीर क्या बनी है, कहने की जरूरत नहीं है। क्या हम उनके पद-चिन्हों पर चलना चाहेंगे, क्या हम शेयर मार्किट में अपने खाद्यान्न, अपनी जिन्सों, अपने अनाजों को सम्बद्ध करके, देश में भुखमरी की स्थिति लाना चाहेंगे।
महोदय, देश के विकास में बैंकों की बहुत बड़ी जिम्मेदारी होती है। शिक्षा लोन, छोटे उद्योगों के लिए लोन, सूक्ष्म, लघु और मध्यम उद्योग जो हमारे देश की रीढ़ हुआ करती थी। पहले लोन साहूकार दिया करते थे। वे मोटी-मोटी ब्याज दरों पर लोगों को लोन दिया करते थे। बहुत दुख के साथ कहना पड़ता है कि आज देश के बैंक उन साहूकारों जैसे ब्याज ले रहे हैं। वे बैंक जैसे सरकार चाहती है, उस तरह की सुविधाएं नहीं दे पा रहे हैं। हमारे देश में राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंकों का व्यवहार साहूकार बैंकों जैसा होता जा रहा है। वर्ष 2007 में ग्रामीण ऋण वितरण 7.93 हुआ था। वर्ष 2006 में इससे ज्यादा 8.93 था। हमें इस दिशा में और बढ़ना चाहिए न कि पीछे हटना चाहिए। हम पंचवर्षीय योजनाओं के माध्यम से अपने देश के विकास को बढ़ाना चाहते हैं, लेकिन दुख के साथ कहना पड़ता है कि गांव का गरीब उच्च शिक्षा के लिए लोन लेना चाहता है या अपने बच्चे को पढ़ाना चाहता है, तकनीकी शिक्षा देना चाहता है तो लोन लेने के लिए जब बैंक में जाता है, तो उसकी चप्पलें घिस जाती हैं और उसे लोन नहीं मिलता है। हम लोग भी ब्रांच मैनेजरों से बात करते हैं और कहते हैं कि बहुत सारी ऐसी योजनाएं हैं, जिनमें ब्याज मुक्त ऋण देने की व्यवस्था है, तो वह उस स्तर पर नहीं पहुंच पाता, जिस स्तर तक पहुंचना चाहिए। आज गांव के विकास को आगे बढ़ाने की जरूरत है। राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंकों को आज पूंजी जुटाने की कुछ ज्यादा ही छूट दी जा रही है। राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक कैसे लोगों को सुविधाएं प्रदान करें, इस पर उन्हें बाउंड नहीं किया जा रहा है। इस समय देश में 20 राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक और 22 निजी बैंक हैं, लेकिन अगर आंकड़े देखें जाएं, तो ग्रामीण अंचलों में, जो सरकार की मंशा है, जो वित्त मंत्री जी अपने भाषण में कह रहे थे, क्या उसका अनुपालन हो रहा है। मैं कहूंगा कि बिलकुल अनुपालन नहीं हो रहा है। हम बैंकों की सुविधाओं को ग्रामीण लोगों तक पहुंचाएं और गांव की झुग्गी-झौपड़ी में रहने वाले लोग भैंस खरीदने के लिए, दुधारू पशु खरीदने के लिए, खाद, बीज तथा खेती के यंत्र खरीदने के लिए ऋण लेना चाहते हैं, उन्हें कठिनाई हो रही है। जबकि बैंकों को सुविधाएं दी गई हैं कि छोटे ऋण ब्याज मुक्त दिए जाएं।
महोदय, मैं आपसे कहना चाहूंगा कि गांव में जरूरतमंद लोगों को व्यवस्था प्रदान की जाए। हमारी जो योजनाएं हैं कि हम बैंकिंग शाखाएं बैंक तक ले जाएंगे, जो योजना वर्ष 2012 तक है, हम बैंकों को गांवों से जोड़ेंगे। जो जरूरतमंद लोग हैं, जो बैंक के माध्यम से अपनी व्यवस्था को सुदृढ़ करना चाहते हैं, जो रोजी-रोटी की तलाश में हैं, जो आतंकवाद की तरफ जा रहे हैं, उन्हें अगर छोटे-मोटे ऋण दिए जाएंगे, तो वे अपनी जीविकोपार्जन में लगेंगे और विशेष रूप से गांव का गरीब, गांव का नौनिहाल, गांव का बेकार और शिक्षित युवक, जिनकी बैंकों में जाते हुए ऐड़ियां घिस जाती हैं, चप्पले टूट जाती हैं, उन्हें ऋण की सुविधाओं से जोड़ा जाए, इस तरफ ध्यान देने की जरूरत है।
महोदय, इन्हीं शब्दों के साथ मैं इस बिल का समर्थन करते हुए अपनी बात समाप्त करता हूं।
श्री मंगनी लाल मंडल (झंझारपुर):सभापति महोदय, भारतीय स्टेट बैंक सब्सीडरी संशोधन विधेयक, 2009 है, बाद में 2010 हुआ। पहले से जो कानून है, उसका संशोधन करना है। हैदराबाद स्टेट बैंक, 1959 का संशोधन करना है और भारतीय स्टेट बैंक समनुषंगी बैंक अधिनियम, 1959 का संशोधन करना है। इसके जो छोटे-छोटे सब्सीडरी बैंक्स हैं, उन बैंकों को स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया में समाहित करना है।
अब इसके पीछे बहुत तर्क है। सबसे बड़ा तर्क है कि एक ही भौगोलिक क्षेत्र में स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया भी है, उसका भी सर्विस एरिया है और जो स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के सब्सिडियरी बैंक्स हैं, उनका भी सर्विस एरिया एक है तो आपस में प्रतिस्पर्धा होती है। आपस में यह प्रतिस्पर्धा नहीं होनी चाहिए। इसीलिए इसको मर्ज कर देना चाहिए। इसीलिए यह मर्जर के लिए विधेयक है।
दूसरा तर्क यह है कि स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया ही इस देश का सबसे बड़ा बैंक है। दो छोटे बैंकों को पहले ही समाहित करा दिया गया था-स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंदौर और स्टेट बैंक ऑफ सौराष्ट्र। दोनों बैंकों के बारे में पहले भी सरकार ने नहीं कहा कि यह घाटे में बैंक था कि एनपीए ज्यादा होता था कि प्रायोरिटी सैक्टर और नॉन प्रायोरिटी सैक्टर मिलाकर जो सरकारी कार्यक्रम है और जो लक्ष्य दिया जाता था, उस लक्ष्य को पूरा नहीं करता था। उसमें भी यह तर्क नहीं दिया गया, यह स्थिति नहीं बताई गई। अभी जो 5 बैंक्स हैं, जिनको मर्ज कराना है, वे हैं- स्टेट बैंक ऑफ बीकानेर जयपुर, स्टेट बैंक ऑफ ट्रैवनकोर, स्टेट बैंक ऑफ पटियाला, स्टेट बैंक ऑफ मैसूर और अंत में स्टेट बैंक ऑफ हैदराबाद। ये पांच बैंक हैं और कुछ बैंकों में इनकी हिस्सेदारी 92 प्रतिशत औऱ 75 प्रतिशत है। ये बैंक अच्छी स्थिति में हैं लेकिन अभी जो अन्तर्राष्ट्रीय जगत है, उसमें ग्लोबल सिनेरियो में स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया का 68वां स्थान है और कहा जाता है कि इसकी जो अधिकृत पूंजी है और निर्गमित पूंजी है, सबको मिलाकर सरकार को इस विधेयक से शक्ति मिलेगी तो अन्तर्राष्ट्रीय क्षेत्र में यह 10वें स्थान पर हो जाएगा। सरकार के दृष्टिकोण में समग्रता नहीं है क्योंकि सरकार जहां स्टेट बैंक के अधीनस्थ जो छोटे-छोटे बैंक हैं, उनका विलय चाहती है तो देश में जितने नेशनेलाइज्ड बैंक हैं, श्रीमती इंदिरा गांधी जी के समय में जो बैंकों का राष्ट्रीयकरण हुआ था, उसका स्पांसर्ड बैंक आरआरबी है। जो छोटे-छोटे बैंक हैं, जिनका उल्लेख मैंने अभी किया जिनका परफार्मेंस अच्छा है, उसका एनपीए स्टेट बैंक के मुकाबले में कम है। इसलिए प्रायोरिटी सैक्टर और नॉन प्रायोरिटी सैक्टर दोनों में काम अच्छा किया है लेकिन आरआरबी चौपट है। कमेटी पर कमेटी रिजर्व बैंक ऑफ इंडिया और भारत सरकार बिठाती है कि री-स्ट्रक्चरिंग करो, आरआरबी का सशक्तीकरण करो। 15 प्रतिशत राज्य सरकारों को पैसा देना है और अपने हिस्से का केन्द्र सरकार पैसा देती है तथा स्पांसर्ड बैंक पैसा देता है। लेकिन इसके बावजूद आरआरबी की सेहत अच्छी नहीं हो रही है। जब छोटे बैंक जो स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के अधीनस्थ हैं, जब इन बैंकों को इसमें मर्ज कर रहे हैं तो आरआरबी को क्यों नहीं? आरआरबी को स्पांसर्ड बैंक में मिला दीजिए। आपके पास कोई ऑथोराइज्ड कैपिटल की समस्या नहीं रहेगी और बड़ा बैंक भी हो जाएगा। इसीलिए सरकार का कोई दृष्टिकोण होना चाहिए। राव साहब चले गये, सिर्फ गरीबों को लोन देने, रोजगार देने और आय का सृजन करने का काम बैंक का नहीं है।
हमने देखा है कि अमेरिका में अभी जो मंदी का संकट आया है, जोशी साहब ने, शरद जी ने तथा और भी कई माननीय सदस्यों ने चर्चा की है, इससे पहले बड़ी मंदी आई थी। सारा देश कांप गया था, सारी दुनिया कांप गई थी लेकिन प्रधान मंत्री और वित्त मंत्री ने कहा कि हमारा बैंकिंग सिस्टम मजबूत है। हमारी अर्थव्यवस्था मजबूत है, हम पर बहुत असर नहीं पड़ेगा। ठीक है कि आपने ससटेन किया, आपने मुकाबला किया। आपका थोड़ा ग्रोथ रेट घटा, लेकिन अभी जो स्थिति अमेरिका की हुई है, उससे दुनिया हिल गई है।
आज थोड़ा शेयर मार्केट में उछाल देखा गया है, कल अमेरिका में था।
दूबे जी ने कहा कि कल अमेरिका में था, ठीक कह रहे हैं। आज सरकार ने जो कहा और रिजर्व बैंक का कंट्राडिक्टरी बयान आ रहा है। बैंक की जबरदस्त भूमिका हमारी मजबूत अर्थव्यवस्था में है, हमने ऐसी व्यवस्था की है लेकिन स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया की स्थिति बहुत खराब है। आपने दूसरे बैंकों को मिलाया, लेकिन स्थिति क्या खराब है, वह यह है एनपीए बढ़ गया। सरकार ने जब बिल पेश किया तो स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया की सेहत कैसी है, इसके बारे में नहीं कहा। मैं चाहता हूं जब माननीय मंत्री जी जब जवाब दें तो कहें की स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया की आर्थिक स्थिति इतनी खराब हो गई थी, एनपीए बढ़ गया, मुनाफा घट गया, ऐसी स्थिति में सब्सिडरी बैंक को मिला रहे हैं। यह क्या है? 11 वर्षों में बैंकों का सबसे खराब प्रदर्शन पिछले वित्तीय वर्षों में रहा है। स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया बैंक ने पिछले वित्तीय वर्ष में मात्र 21 करोड़ रुपया मुनाफा कमाया। कॉरपोरेट सैक्टर में छोटी कंपनियां 21 करोड़ रुपया मुनाफा कमाती हैं जबकि स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया देश का सबसे बड़ा बैंक है और इस बैंक में छोटे सब्सिडरी बैंक का मर्जर करना चाहते हैं। मर्जर इसलिए करना चाहते हैं कि हम वैश्विक स्तर पर 10वें स्थान में चले जाएं। आस्ट्रेलिया और दूसरे देशों में ब्रांच खोलना चाहते हैं। पिछले वित्तीय वर्ष में स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया को 21 करोड़ रुपया मात्र मुनाफ हुआ है, सरकार को बताना होगा कि ऐसा क्यों हुआ है? मुनाफा घटा है और एनपीए बढ़ा है। एनपीए कितना बढ़ा है, 21 दूनी 42 करोड़ रुपए नहीं, 100 करोड़ रुपया नहीं, 200 करोड़ रुपया नहीं बल्कि 1868 करोड़ रुपए स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया का एनपीए हुआ है। बैंक का एनपीए बढ़ रहा है, मुनाफा घट रहा है, बैंक ने सर्विस एरिया सबसे ज्यादा लिया है, सबसे ज्यादा डिस्ट्रिक्ट लीड बैंक स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया है, इस बैंक में वन स्टाफिंग ब्रांचिस हैं। ब्रांचिस में ठीक कार्य नहीं हो रहा है। सरकार आज भी स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया की स्थिति नहीं बता पा रही है। मैं सरकार से जानना चाहूंगा कि स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया के स्टाफ की टोटल स्ट्रैंथ कितनी है, कितनी वैकेंसी है और कितनी रूरल ब्रांच हैं जो वन मैन ब्रांच, अंडर स्टाफिंग है? आप ऐसी स्थिति में स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया को अन्य बैंकों के साथ जोड़ रहे हैं, जो छोटे बैंक हैं, अच्छा काम कर रहे हैं, अच्छा मुनाफा कर रहे हैं, जिनका एनपीए प्रतिशत अनुपात में कम है।
सभापति महोदय : आप बहुत अच्छा बोल रहे हैं, मेरा मन भी कर रहा है कि मैं सुनता जाऊं। लेकिन आपको कन्कलूड करना पड़ेगा।
श्री मंगनी लाल मंडल : महोदय, हमारे देश में 89 बैंक हैं जिनमें 31 प्राइवेट हैं, 31 विदेशी हैं। शेष 27 राष्ट्रीयकृत विदेशी बैंक इस देश में आ गए, सरकार इसके लिए सचेत है कि हमारे यहां विदेशी बैंक आएंगे तो देशी बैंकों के साथ मुकाबला होगा तो कैपिटल इनफलो होगा। यह सरकार की नीति है। 53000 ब्रांचिस हैं और 17000 एटीएम फैसिलिटी की गई है। वित्त मंत्री जी ने कहा है कि 73000 गांवों को 2011-12 के अंत तक बैंकिंग फैसिलिटी देंगे। मैं कहना चाहता हूं कि बैंकिंग फैसिलिटी नेशनलाइज बैंक हैं उन्हीं के माध्यम से देनी है।
जो प्राइवेट बैंक्स हैं, वे डिपाजिट लेते हैं, लेकिन प्राइवेट बैंक्स सोशल रिस्पांसिबिलिटी को वहन नहीं करते हैं और सरकार के पास कोई कानून नहीं है कि प्राइवेट बैंक्स को सामाजिक दायित्व के निर्वहन के लिए प्रेरित कर सके या उन्हें दबा सके। यह ठीक है कि जो कारपोरेट सैक्टर है, वह भी चाहता है कि मर्जर हो, सरकार की जो वित्त की स्थाई समिति है, मैं भी उस समिति का मैम्बर हूं, मंत्रालय की ओर से कहा गया और सरकार भी चाहती है कि मर्जर हो। कारपोरेट सैक्टर भी चाहता है कि मर्जर हो। कारपोरेट सैक्टर नेशनलाइज्ड बैंक्स से खुलकर ऋण लेते हैं और एनपीए भी करते हैं। एनपीए कोई छोटा एकाउंट नहीं है बल्कि एनपीए के बड़े-बड़े एकाउंट है। इसके अलावा जो देश के बड़े प्राइवेट बैंक्स हैं, उनके पास कोई सामाजिक दायित्व नहीं हैं, वे सिर्फ कारपोरेट सैक्टर को लोन देते हैं। जो 53 हजार ब्रांचेज हैं, उनमें आरआरवीज भी नहीं है। आप देखें कि हमारे यहां कितने गांव हैं।
महोदय, एक बात कहकर मैं अपनी बात समाप्त करूंगा। आपने लुई फिशर का नाम सुना होगा। साबरमती आश्रम में लुई फिशर ने महात्मा गांधी से पूछा कि बापू यह बताओ, आपका स्वराज्य कैसा होगा? तब बापू ने लुई फिशर से कहा, आप जानते हैं कि लुई फिशर ने कई किताबें लिखी हैं। उन्होंने स्टालिन, लेनिन, गांधी आदि पर किताबें लिखी हैं। उन्होंने कहा कि जब हमारे देश में स्वराज्य होगा तो यहां सात लाख रिपब्लिक होंगे। लुई फिशर चकराया कि यह कैसा आदमी है, जबकि देश को एक करना है, अखंड करना है, देश में छह सौ से ऊपर रियासतें हैं। ये सबको मिलाने की बात नहीं कर रहे हैं और यह कहते हैं कि सात लाख रिपब्लिक होगा। तब उन्होंने बापू से पूछा कि यह बताओ कि सात लाख रिपब्लिक कैसे होंगे। तब गांधी जी ने कहा कि हमारा देश सात लाख गांवों का देश है। सात लाख रिपब्लिक यानी बंगलादेश और पाकिस्तान को मिलाकर सात लाख रेवेन्यू विलेजिज थे और हमारा एक-एक गांव रिपब्लिक होगा, जहां सारी व्यवस्था, प्रबंधन हमारा होगा। लेकिन उन्हीं गांवों में बैंक का नेटवर्क भी होगा। यह गांधी जी ने लुई फिशर को कहा था। सात लाख गणराज्य का जो एक इंडियन रिपब्लिक होगा, वह बड़ा शक्तिशाली होगा। मैं सरकार से जानना चाहता हूं कि पहले यह बतायें कि आरआरवीज, कोऑपरेटिव्ज, डिस्ट्रिक्ट कोऑपरेटिव बैंक्स को छोड़कर जो 53 हजार ब्रांचेज हैं, 73 हजार ब्रांचेज खोलने का वित्त मंत्री का ऐलान नहीं है, वित्त मंत्री का ऐलान यह है कि 73 हजार गांवों को बैंकों की सुविधा देंगे। इसलिए मैं कहना चाहता हूं कि भले ही आप दसवें स्थान पर पहुंच जाएं, लेकिन हमें यह बताइये कि स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया सबसे बड़ा बैंक है। इस देश का आर्थिक दायित्व बहुत बड़ा है, उसमें गांवों में शाखा के विस्तार के लिए क्या किया है ।
मैं आपको श्रीमती इंदिरा गांधी की याद दिलाना चाहता हूं - 1971 में उन्होंने बैंकों के राष्ट्रीयकरण के बाद नारा दिया था - वे कहते हैं इंदिरा हटाओ, मैं कहती हूं गरीबी हटाओ। ऐ देशवासियों, तय करो, इन्दिरा हटाओ या गरीबी हटाओ। तब देश की जनता ने कहा कि इन्दिरा गांधी सही हैं, गरीबी हटानी है। मैं सरकार से जानना चाहता हूं कि बैंकों को आप एसबीआई में मर्ज कर रहे हैं, लेकिन इस विधेयक में श्रीमती इन्दिरा गांधी के गरीबी हटाओ के नारे का आप कहां तक परिपालन करेंगे, आर्थिक समृद्धि में इसका कितना योगदान होगा और देहाती इलाकों की ब्रांचों को कर्मचारियों से भरपूर करने में कितना सहायक होगा। इतना कहकर मैं अपनी बात समाप्त करता हूं।
SHRI A. SAMPATH (ATTINGAL): Mr. Chairman, Sir, I would like to thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak on this Bill. I oppose this Bill in toto.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you oppose it?
SHRI A. SAMPATH : Yes, Sir. During our school days, we have learnt a poem:
“Pussy Cat, Pussy Cat, where have you been?
I have been up to London to look at the Queen” Just one hour back, I heard a poem here in this House – hon. Ministers, hon. Ministers where have you been? When we were discussing such an important Bill initiated by the Government in this august House, many of the Ministers were missing. This is just for your information because you have entered the House after that, and that has already gone. … (Interruptions)Anyway, that they may reply. This is just for information because it is the primary duty of the Treasury Benches to see that there is quorum in the House and the Bill is smoothly passed in the House. But unfortunately what we had experienced this situation. Sir, with your permission, I would like to request you to convey my regards to them.
This Bill is continuation of a process and that process is to privatise the Indian banking system. Within two decades, our banking sector is going to be one of the largest banking sectors in the world, next to China. Now, we are almost having the rank of third largest banking network in the work. The number of branches we have is increased only because they are the public sector banks. Now, my humble question to the Government of India is this. I want to know whether the Government of India want to kill the golden goose. Whatever they say, if they are saying about profitability, my humble request, through you, is – “people before profits.” This is the largest democracy in the world; second largest populated country in the world. Our people need more banks, more banking facilities, more efficient services. But what happens here? Now, the Government of India intends to take away the powers which the Reserve Bank of India is having. Only then, the Government can sell the equities. The RBI cannot sell on its own. So, they are taking the powers under the pretext of increasing the efficiency, increasing the banking activity, spreading of banking activities, deepening of credit, etc. Whatever may be the music they may be singing, the true intention is to kill the public sector banks.
What is the experience of those nations which have denationalised or privatised those banks? We have come through an era of global economic meltdown, which has started due to the sub-prime crisis that took place in the United States. It was a manipulated crisis; it was a man-made crisis; it was an inevitable crisis. At that time, many of our friends said, no, it will not hurt Middle Eastern countries; no, it will not hurt India, “no, it will not spread to European countries.” We all know that there was a change of Government in Iceland; there were revolts in Iceland; there were rebellions and revolts throughout Europe; people attacked ATM machines; they attacked banks; looting and arson happened. I am not saying that just now what is happening in the UK is because of this. But all the private banks in Iceland were nationalised again. At that time, our rulers said, even – with your permission and I may be permitted to quote our hon. Finance Minister, Shri Pranab Mukherjee, who in this august House while answering to the Starred Question No.82, on 5th of August – the hon. Minister stated that we have a different system. Just because we have a different system, our banks saved our financial sector; our banks will not collapse. That is his reply - our banks will not collapse, we have a different system. so, do not worry about economic global meltdown and the financial crisis that had happened there. But what does the Government of India want to do? What are they going to do? They want to follow the path taken by those banks. There may be some people who may say that, big is beautiful just like some others say, small is beautiful.
I am not concerned whether big is beautiful or small is beautiful. My nation is beautiful, my nation should be beautiful, and our people’s concerns should be addressed.
Sir, I am coming from a State where the people are asking me as to what is the fate of the State Bank of Travancore. Not even a single paisa was spent by the Government of India for the establishment of the State Bank of Travancore. That bank was established by the erstwhile Maharaja of Travancore. All the deposits are from the people who are working abroad or who are working inside India and even within my State also. It is the people’s money. Now the Government of India wants to – I may be excused for using such a term – slaughter it. It is waiting for its turn in the butcher’s house. What has happened to the State Bank of Indore? Then they have showed the way for the State Bank of Saurashtra.
MR. CHAIRMAN : Sampathji, what you are speaking, is it not against the ideology of your party?
SHRI A. SAMPATH : No, Sir. I am speaking fully in line with the ideology of my party. I represent the ideology of my party as well as the concerns of the people. So I am airing the voice of the people. They have killed the State Bank of Saurashtra, they have killed the State Bank of Indore, and now they are going to kill the State Bank of Travancore which cannot be tolerated by the people.
Sir, the State Bank of India is the nation’s bank. I am proud of its activities. There is a news item in today’s newspaper which is the largest circulated Malayalam newspaper. Even our Congress colleagues will be happy when I quote from that newspaper here. It has reported a news item saying that yesterday the hon. High Court of Kerala has severely deplored the intention and attitude shown by some of the banks, including the public sector banks. They are very much hesitant to give education loans. We all have children. This is the case of children who do not have the voting rights. A child applied for a loan. He gave property, including the house and agricultural property, of his mother worth Rs. 80 lakh as security. The amount of loan applied for was only Rs. 20 lakh. The bank manager said, ‘no, this cannot be given’. This is what is happening now. At the same time, there are agents. I would say that a new mafia is emerging in the banking sector with the connivance of self-financing educational institutions. They are saying, “you go and join there, we will give you the loan. You go to that bank, we will admit you here”. It is a case of ‘you scratch my head; I will scratch your shoulder’. This is happening in the financial sector. What our Finance Minister has declared in his Budget Speech and what the Indian Banks Association has said should be ensured and our children should get the benefits of educational loans.
Sir, while opposing this Bill, I would like to point out one thing. How many posts are remaining vacant in these banks? Why do they not fill them up? They are indulging in outsourcing. In the name of outsourcing, what is happening in the banking sector? We are compromising with the basic provisions of the Constitution of India which was drafted by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. Where is social justice? How many people belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Muslims are working in banks? Their number is coming down. How many of them are working in the officer cadre? Their number is coming down. They are poaching the skilled labour under the name of outsourcing.So, where is social justice? Mere rhetoric about social justice and reservation will not do. Whenever a financial institution is privatized, it is the killing time for the principles of social justice and reservation.
MR. CHAIRMAN : Please conclude now.
SHRI A. SAMPATH : Sir, I am an obedient Member. Definitely I am going to conclude.
Sir, we are having thousands and thousands of ATMs in our country. To use the ATMs, one needs eyes. But there are persons who are visually impaired and there are persons who do not have the ability to hear. Some provision should be made in the ATMs so that the visually impaired also can use them.
I have also personally experienced that many of the disabled persons cannot use the ATMs because of their position that they have kept and because of the language which they use in the ATMs. If you want English, press 1, if you want Hindi, press 2, if you want the local language Malayalam, press 3. When I press 3, then it is down, it finishes and automatically it goes to Hindi or English language. If I do not know either English or Hindi, how can I operate that ATM? A large proportion of our population use the vernacular languages. But these ATM machines are manufactured by well qualified, highly skilled, well educated people, they have put only these languages. This is the people’s money and they want to use it, so let them have the benefit of vernacular languages.
MR. CHAIRMAN : Thank you, Mr. Sampath.
SHRI A. SAMPATH : Sir, I plead for your mercy. Please allow me some more time. This is a very important thing because this concerns about the money also.
Now, it is the time when 25 paise, 50 paise are all being banned. No child can go to a shop and ask, ‘uncle give me one toffee for 50 paise’. He cannot buy it because it is banned. It is a contraband. This is happening in India. How many nations have banned the usage of small denominations? The United States of America, the UK have not banned. Even China has not banned. We are banning the usage of 1 paisa, two paise, 5 paise, 10 paise, 25 paise, etc. All these coins are disappearing. You have to use only one rupee coin. You are inviting a punishment, a penalty. This is going to be banned. I am strongly opposing this.
Sir, there are private banks, there are foreign banks and there are public banks also. But do we need to kill the regional flavour of the nationalised banks? The regional flavour of the nationalised banks is a must, is a necessity. This is a country of diversities. That diversity is our unity and the strength for our unity.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Sampath, there is a time constraint, so please conclude now.
SHRI A. SAMPATH : Sir, I am concluding. Our banks should not forget their social responsibility, I mean, the constitutional obligations. I would like to invite the attention of the hon. Minister and the Government of India that this is the people’s money, this is nation’s wealth, this should not be thrown to the mercy or the whims and fancies of the foreign banks. We have come to an age, we have reached this stage not because of any foreign intervention or help.
Before concluding, I would like to quote from the report of one international consultancy firm, even though some of us may disagree with them in many matters and even I also disagree, they have made it clear. This firm is US based firm, known as Price Waterhouse Cooper. They have said, “The E-7 – we also are categorised in E-7, the developing nations -- does not need the G-7 -- the richest of the world -- for capital, for decision making, or consumers.” So, this is not for the benefit of we people but for the benefit of those people that this Bill is introduced as part and parcel of other Bills which have been introduced and unfortunately, getting passed and more and more will come that will lead to a deplorable condition, if not, an anarchy in the Indian financial sector.
With these words, I would like to conclude my speech.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB (CUTTACK): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Sir for allowing me to participate in this discussion on the Bill, The State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks Laws) Amendment Bill 2009.
Such attempts were made during the National Democratic Alliance’s tenure and very rightly when the Finance Minister, the Leader of this House, stood up last Friday and said that “we will be only pursuing the agenda that had been fixed by the NDA, I need your support.” In that respect, I would say that this is an attempt to further the agenda that has been going on for the last two decades.
I have certain concerns while supporting this Bill. Those concerns are not relating to the functioning of the banking sector as such but relating to the specific Bill that is before us today.
There have been many signals in the Government’s opinion that India needs more banks. That is why following the Finance Minister’s announcement, that was made during last year when the Budget was presented, RBI had put out a Discussion Paper in August, 2010 inviting views on whether banking licences should be issued to industrial houses and also whether non-banking finance companies should be allowed to convert themselves into banks or to promote banks. I think that report must have been before the Government of India today which RBI had circulated.
There have also been calls in the Government circles for more banks in the rural sector. Tomorrow, we have a question listed as the second question relating to the rural banking system. Already four decades have passed since 1969-70. Still we hear today in this House eulogising nationalisation of banks. But, what have we achieved? I think, it is high time that we discuss this issue. After nationalisation of banks, a lot of things have happened. But, has the expectation been met? Have we achieved the expectations of 1969-70 relating to nationalisation? Or, are there certain flaws yet which need to be addressed? I think, only 51 per cent of the population is accessing the facility of the banking sector.
What is the position of banks in our country today? Some information has been provided by Mr. Mandal here. Currently, India has 89 scheduled commercial banks out of which there are 27 public sector banks, 31 private banks, and 31 foreign banks operating. Together they account for about 53,000 branches and 17,000 ATMs. The Minister can correct me if I am wrong. In addition, there are the regional rural cooperatives, regional rural banks, local area banks, urban cooperative banks, and district central cooperative banks. So, what do you mean by the need for more banks? Do you mean more branches or more banks as distinct legal entities? What do we need more? Do we need more number of banks or we need more branches of respective banks that are existing today? My opinion is that we need a bit of both. This is because, it is only when we have more banks, we may have more branches. When we have more banks, we will have more competition. It is only when we have more compeition, we have greater range of products and services and a better quality of both. It is only under these conditions of healthy competition that the customer may more likely get a fair deal at the hands of the banking sector. Imagine the plight of a customer service if most of the branches were controlled by a small number of banks.
It is in this context, I would like this House to remember what happened last Friday. Most of the nationalised banks were on strike.
But still it did not affect the running of the finances of this country. I would appreciate if we have more number of banks. It is in this context, the State Bank of India’s earlier merger of the subsidiary State Bank of Indore, State Bank of Patiala and State Bank of Hyderabad were opposed. At a time, when the Government’s stated intent is to increase the number of banks and for its own largest bank to move forward, becoming a monolith by merging all its subsidiaries seems to make a little sense. I would like to say that the Government is on in record saying that initiative for consolidation has to come from the management of the banks themselves with the Government playing a supportive role as the common shareholder. How can the Government confine itself to only a supportive role? This is unacceptable. This is indicative of ambivalence in Government’s approach on the merger. We have to come out very clearly on this aspect.
The present Bill before us, however, is to transfer the ownership of SBI from Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to the Union Government pursuant to the SBI Amendment Act of 2007.
The Narasimham Committee’s Report in 1998 had observed that ‘the Reserve Bank as a regulator of the monetary system should not be also the owner of the bank in view of the potential for conflict of interest’. On the policy stands of the Government, on the merger, the subsidiary with the SBI, it was stated that consolidation would bring in economies of scale, reduce administrative overheads, redeploy and channelise trained manpower to business development. And in the process, also reduce avoidable competition from different arms of the same group, engaged in the same activity, in the same segment and geography. Such amalgamation will free a large number of employees from administrative function; to be deployed in business development, lending and to all-round growth in business and profitability. I would like to understand as to what has happened after four years. You are still engaged with business representatives. Some of us have the letter written by the Managing Director, State Bank of India, which clearly says as to how the business representatives are looting certain customers of SBI and to refrain from appointing those business representatives to which my comrade friend has used the word ‘mafia’.
MR. CHAIRMAN : Please conclude.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : Sir, I will take another two minutes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Take exactly two minutes more.
SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB: It is a fact that the employees, of course, this issue has been raised by the initiator of this debate, after the merger, are enjoying better status but the problem lies with the persons who have already retired. The Bill is silent on issues like pension. Are you going to carry out amendments in the State Bank of India Pension Fund Rules to take care of payment of pension to the retired employees of the merged subsidiary banks? This needs to be looked into.
I am of the opinion that Government stance and approach in bringing legislative changes in the Act, regulating SBI and its subsidiary in particular, are ad hoc in nature. You did one in 2007 and another in 2009. Now, in 2011, you have brought another Bill for amendment.
15.00 hrs. Please do away with this ad hocism. Bring in a comprehensive Bill so that, I think, this House will support you in full.
Last Friday morning, I had drawn the attention of the Government about the huge NPAs of the SBI group of banks. What answer do you have after RBI has come down so heavily on the SBI management? I did not get the answer that day but I would expect you to give your answer to that in your free time. Should I believe that SBI is unable to manage a large size bank? I would expect the Government to spell out the policy.
I would like to draw the attention to the amendment made in the Subsidiary Bank law vide SBI Subsidiary Bank Law (Amendment) Act, 2007, which enabled the Chairman, SBI to nominate the Chairman of Board of a subsidiary bank from the franchises of the subsidiary as well and entrusted the regulation making power with the Board of Directors of the subsidiary bank. It is yet to be given effect to. I would like to understand why?
Amendments remain to be made in the SBI Funds Rules. Why? Is this not detrimental to the retirees of the merged subsidiary banks?
With these words, I conclude.
MR. CHAIRMAN : Now, Shri Prabodh Panda. Please note that there is a time-limit.
SHRI PRABODH PANDA (MIDNAPORE): Mr. Chairman, Sir, I am aware of the time constraint but even then I would request you to allow me to touch upon the points. I am not going to make a very long speech.
Sir, I rise to oppose this Bill.
My previous speakers narrated the state of affairs and the health of the State Bank of India. The speaker from the Congress Party, hon. Dr. K.S. Rao, has already said about the responsibility of the State Bank of India, the largest bank of our country and also its social responsibility. I am not going to touch all these points.
Sir, it is revealed that the State Bank of India, which is the largest bank of our country, has now become a very big white elephant. What is the health of this elephant? It is already by my previous speaker that the NPAs are increasing like anything. A couple of years back, one data had been released by the Reserve Bank of India – it was published by the All India Bank Employees’ Association – that the NPAs were about one lakh crore rupees covering all the nationalized banks and the largest share was from the State Bank of India. Defaulters worth more than Rs.1 crore are the billionaires, and they are the main defaulters. So, this is the situation. On the other hand, the profit of the State Bank of India is decreasing day by day.
What is the vacancy situation? A number of vacancies remain vacant. What is needed today? More branches should be opened in the villages. A large part of the rural areas of our country is out of this coverage. In such a situation, this sort of legislation is detrimental and it will not serve the purpose. Rather it will give more authoritarianism to the State Bank of India and the Union Government.
Sir, this Bill amends the State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956 and the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959. These two Acts regulate all the subsidiary banks of the State Bank of India.
So, the State Bank of India was the regulator of the subsidiary banks. Now, this new law is going to control all the banks, not as a regulator, but as authoritarian and is giving more powers to the Central Government in this relation.
The Bill also requires approvals from the Central Government for increasing its issued capital by issuing equity shares, by public issues, by preferential allotment or by private placement issuing bonus shares. So, it will open the door for more privatisation. This is the essence of this Bill.
Other decisions that require approval from the Central Government in consultation with the RBI, include the composition of the Board of Directors of the subsidiary bank, nominations or appointments of Directors to the subsidiary banks, appointing a Managing Director and removal of Directors. So, all sorts of democratic process would be curtailed. This sort of legislation has been brought before us! In certain cases, the RBI, on the recommendation of the SBI, may supersede the Board of Directors of the subsidiary bank and issue directions.
Sir, this Bill is going to open doors for more privatisation; this Bill is going to curtail the rights of the subsidiary banks; this Bill is going to damage the very potentiality of the State Bank of India; and this Bill is detrimental to the health of our banking system. That is why I have risen here to oppose this Bill. But I hope, the Government would think over it.
Sir, the other day, in this very august House, the hon. Finance Minister proudly said: “We are not much affected by this international economic meltdown; and it is because of the strong health of our banking system.” But you, the Government, are now, step-by-step going to weaken the banking system of our country. This legislation is one of such steps. That is why I am opposing it.
I hope the Union Government would ponder over it and would not go ahead with it. If we want to strengthen the very economic strength of our country, the very economic situation of our country, the Government should not liquidate the rights of all the subsidiary banks. Do not go for further merger. Strengthen the banking system and not weaken it.
These are my main points. With these words I conclude and I oppose this Bill.
सभापति महोदय : श्री रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह। कृपानिधान जी, पहले मेरी बात सुन लीजिए। समय का थोड़ा ध्यान रखिये।
डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह (वैशाली):जी। सभापति महोदय, यह जो बैंक से सम्बन्धित विधेयक सरकार के द्वारा आया है, इसमें सरकार ने दावा किया है कि सन् 2007 में यह कानून बना था, जिसमें रिजर्व बैंक ऑफ इंडिया की जो मिल्कियत थी, उस मिल्कियत की जगह पर सैण्ट्रल गवर्नमेंट आ जायेगा। वह मिल्कियत रिजर्व बैंक के बदले सैण्ट्रल गवर्नमेंट होने से उनको कानून लाना पड़ा, जो सन् 1956 का कानून हैदराबाद स्टेट बैंक का था और सन् 1959 का कानून जो स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया सब्सिडियरी वाला कानून है, उसमें इस संशोधन का इन्होंने दावा किया है।
महोदय, हम नहीं जानते हैं कि बैंकिंग मामले में रिजर्व बैंक ऑफ इंडिया ज्यादा काबिल है कि सैण्ट्रल गवर्नमेंट ज्यादा काबिल है। इस सब की हमको जानकारी नहीं है। इस मामले में गांव-ग्राम से अधिक हम नहीं जानते, लेकिन सरकार ने रिजर्व बैंक ञफ इंडिया के बदले अपने पास उस मिल्कियत को ले लिया, उसके चलते यह कानून आया। पुराने जमाने में सरकार के वित्त मंत्री ने रिजर्व बैंक ऑफ इंडिया गवर्नर बहाल किया, रिजर्व बैंक ऑफ इंडिया गवर्नर मंत्री हो गये, प्रधानमंत्री हो गये और वित्त-मंत्री वित्त-मंत्री ही रह गये तो यह पुराने जमाने से चल रहा है, इसमें ज्यादा डिटेल में मैं नहीं जाऊंगा।
रिजर्व बैंक आफ इंडिया सेंट्रल गवर्नमेंट का सवाल है। जब सेंट्रल गवर्नमेंट के हाथ मे मिलकियत है, तो हमारा सवाल नंबर एक है, हमारे वामपंथी मित्र से कहना चाहता हूं कि पांच तारीख को देश भर में बैंक की हड़ताल हुयी, तो आपने क्यों नहीं इस सवाल को उठाया? किस वास्ते यह हड़ताल हुयी? वर्ष 2007 के कानून के मुताबिक ये कानून लेकर वर्ष 2011 में आए हैं। इन्होंने दावा किया कि वर्ष 2007 में जो कानून बना था, उसके चलते वर्ष 2011 में यह हो रहा है, तब तो यह चार वर्ष विलंब से अब हुआ। 5 अगस्त को देश भर में बैंकों की हड़ताल हुयी। इसमें कितनी बर्बादी हुयी, उनकी मांग क्या है? आज छः दिन के बाद हम बैंक पर, विधेयक पर बहस चला रहे हैं। इसमें सवाल नंबर एक है कि उनकी मांगें क्या थीं, क्यों हड़ताल हुयी और देश की कितनी बर्बादी हुयी और कारोबार में कितना नुकसान हुआ? इसका जवाब दें। ...( व्यवधान) आज मौका मिला, यह तो वर्ष 2007 के कानून की बात है, हम तो छः दिन के बाद बोल रहे हैं। ...( व्यवधान)
सभापति महोदय : रघुवंश बाबू, आसन की ओर देखकर अपनी बात कहिए।
डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह : महोदय, अब मेरा सवाल नंबर दो है।
सभापति महोदय : आप कहां तक जाएंगे?
डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह : चार से ज्यादा सवाल नहीं पूछेंगे। इस बिल में है कि मैनेजिंग डायरेक्टर को बहाल करने में और इस सब में सरकार के हाथ में यह हो गया। अभी स्टेट बैंक में पचास एग्जीक्यूटिव मैनेजमेंट के लोग और सौ पीओज बहाल हुए। पीओ बहाल होने के लिए कंपटीशन होता है, मैनेजमेंट एग्जीक्यूटिव कंपटीशन से बहाल हुआ। पीओ का प्रोबेशन दो वर्ष का है, जिसमें 730 दिन होते हैं। 729वें दिन सौ पीओज को हटा दिया और पचास लोग मैनेजमेंट एग्जीक्यूटिव के हटा दिए गए। अभी इस घटना के कुछ दिन ही हुए हैं। उसका साल भर का टाइम था, लेकिन उसे 365 दिन के बदले 364वें दिन हटा दिया। यह सरकार को जानकारी है, हटाने की, रखने की आपकी जिम्मेदारी है, लेकिन स्टेट बैंक में अभी पचास मैनेजमेंट एग्जीक्यूटिव को हटा दिया गया और सौ पीओज को हटा दिया गया। अगर एक साल पूरा हो जाता तो उसका अधिकार बन जाता, आप लोग कानून के बारे में ज्यादा जानते हैं। एक साल तक उनको मनमानी करने का हक है। 365 दिन के बदले 364वें दिन उसे एक कलम के आर्डर से हटाया। उनका क्या कसूर है? मैं यह इंसाफ चाहता हूं। मैं सदन को जानकारी देकर न्याय चाहता हूं। वह कहते हैं कि नौकरी दी जाए, कर्मचारियों की कमी है और लड़ाई लड़ते हैं कि आउट-सोर्सिंग हो रही है, जबकि यह तो कंपटीशन से बहाल आदमी को मनमाने ढंग से हटाया। वे सब अभी कोर्ट में दर-दर भटक रहे हैं। वे मेधावी लड़के जो कंपटीशन से मैनेजमेंट एग्जीक्यूटिव में और पीओ के पद पर बहाल हुए थे, कुल डेढ़ सौ आदमियों को हटाया गया। सवाल नंबर दो का जवाब दें कि क्या सरकार को जानकारी है? उनके साथ क्या न्याय हुआ है, उसका क्या कसूर है कि 365वें दिन के बदले 364वें दिन हटा दिया? उन्होंने कहा कि हमें पावर है कि साल भर के अंदर में हम जब चाहेंगे उनको हटा सकते हैं। यह कौन सा कानून है, यह कहां का न्याय है, कहां की डेमोक्रेसी है, कहां है जनतंत्र, कहां है संविधान? यह बहुत भारी अंधेर हुआ। मेरा स्पेसिफिक सवाल नंबर दो है कि क्या सरकार को इसकी जानकारी है कि नहीं? ...( व्यवधान) यह दूसरा सवाल है।
सभापति महोदय : टोटल तीन हैं।
डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह : महोदय, इसमें कैटेगरीकली जवाब नहीं चाहते, एक्शन चाहते हैं कि उनको फिर से बहाल किया जाए। उनको क्यों हटाया गया? यदि कोई कसूर है, तो मैं नहीं कहूंगा। कोई हेराफरी या गड़बड़ी है, तब मैं इसके लिए नहीं कहूंगा। बिना कोई हेर-फेरी, बिना कोई कसूर, बिना कोई शोकाज, बिना कोई जांच-पड़ताल के 100 पीओ एवं 500 एक्जक्यूटिव मैनेजमेंट ऑफिसर, जो पीओ से थोड़ा ऊपर रैंक के होते हैं उनको हटा दिया गया। 365 दिन नहीं पूरा होने दिया, 364वें दिन उन्हें हटा दिया। 730 दिन पूरा नहीं होने देंगे, 729वें दिन उन्हें हटा दिया। मैंने ऐसा अंधरगर्दी न तो देखा है और न सुना है। दुख है, अफसोस है, आश्चर्य ही नहीं गुस्सा भी है। सरकार को बताना पड़ेगा कि क्यों ऐसा हुआ है? जो गलत निर्णय हुआ है उसको सुधार कर सदन में जवाब देना पड़ेंगा।
सभापति महोदय : धन्यवाद।
डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह : जिन्हें गलत हटाया गया है उन्हें बहाल किया जाए। नहीं तो वे गरीब लड़के कोर्ट-कचहरी जा रहे हैं। बेरोजगारी का सवाल है। वे मेघावी लड़के हैं। वे कंपीटीशन से आए थे।
सभापति महोदय : तीसरा प्वाइंट बोल कर समाप्त कीजिए।
डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह : तीसरा, गांवों में बैंक नहीं है। गांवों में बहुत बैंक जाना भी नहीं चाहता है। बैंक बहुत सिमट रहा है। दावा बहुत हो रहा है। गांवों में बैंक की शाखाओं की इतनी कमी और गांवों में बसने वालों को कितना ऋण मिला तो 7 प्रतिशत। अर्धशहरी और शहरी लोगों को 92 परसेंट ऋण मिलता है। यह क्या हिसाब चल रहा है? देश कहां जा रहा है? ये कहते हैं कि गांव वालों को बैंक की कहां सहायता है। वे अभी भी पुराने जमाने में चल रहे हैं। बैंक भी अब साहूकार हो रहा है। वह गांव में नहीं जाना चाहता है। इसलिए अभी-अभी हाल में मुजफ्फरपुर जिला का ग्रामीण बैंक, बारून थाना में सरमसपुर मैनेजर के ऊपर भी हंगामा है, एजिटेशन चल रहा है ग्रामीण बैंक के लोग कर्मचारी अधिकारी ...( व्यवधान) गांव में बैंक का सवाल आया तो परेशानी शुरु हो गई। गांव की आबादी 72 परसेंट और लोन 7 परसेंट। कर्जा भी नहीं दे रहे हो तो उनको रोजगार कहां तक दोगे। महोदय गांव के लोगों का क्या हाल है।
सभापति महोदय : बहुत-बहुत धन्यवाद।
डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह : मैं यह बता रहा था कि बारून थाना के सरमसपुर गांव का मैंनेजर दलाल के चंगुल में नहीं आया। उसको मार कर टांग दिया और बाहर से ताला बंद कर चला गया। दो रोज के बाद जब दुर्गन्ध हुई तब वहां लोग पहुंचे। ग्रामीण बैंक का यूनियन संघर्ष कर रहा है कि सीबीआई जांच कराओ। लोकल पुलिस को अभी तक कुछ भी पता नहीं चल पाया है। कहते हैं कि आश्रित को नौकरी दो। उसके बाल-बच्चा का क्या होगा? गांव के बैंक में काम कर रहा था इसलिए जान मार से दिया।
सभापति महोदय : अब कृपया संक्षिप्त करें।
डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह : उसकी हत्या हो गई। यूनियन के लोग लड़ रहे हैं। सवाल नम्बर तीन हम सरकार से चाहते हैं।
सभापति महोदय : तीन हो गया।
डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह : उसके आश्रित को नौकरी दी जाए और सीबीआई से जांच कर उनको पकड़ा जाए। अंत मैं यह कहना चाहता हूं कि मुजफ्फरपुर बैंक का सवाल स्पेसिफिक है। मुजफ्फरपुर में कैनरा बैंक का रिजनल ऑफिस था, उसे हटा दिया। फिर बैंक ऑफ बड़ौदा का रिजनल ऑफिस डिजर्व करता था, सब बैंक वाले आए थे हमारे पास, कहा बैंक का भी कुछ आए तो उसमें हम लोगों का सुना जाए। आप जानते हैं कि बिहार में पटना के बाद मुजफ्फरपुर बिहार की राजनैतिक राजधानी है। सब जगह बैंक बढ़ रहा है वहां बैंक घट रहा है। देहात में तो नहीं है बैं। मुजफ्फरपुर में भी कैनरा बैंक, बड़ौदा बैंक का रिजनल ऑफिस होना चाहिए।
बैंक के बिना गरीबी कैसे हटेगी। बैंक में 20 लाख करोड़ रुपये जमा हैं। गरीब लोग अपना पेट काटकर बैंक में पैसे जमा करते हैं।...( व्यवधान) लेकिन उन्हें लोन नहीं मिलेगा। लोन दूसरे लोगों को मिलेगा।...( व्यवधान)
ये लोग एनपीए, एनपीए भााण कर रहे थे। एनपीए की जांच की जाए।...( व्यवधान) ऐसा असैट जो परफार्म नहीं करे। जो परफार्म नहीं करे, क्या वह असैट हुआ? यह चालाकी है। यह गलत पॉलिसी है जो परफार्म नहीं करे।...( व्यवधान)बड़े लोगों ने लूट का पैसा लेकर डुबा दिया।...( व्यवधान)
सभापति महोदय : रघुवंश जी, मैं दूसरे माननीय सदस्य का नाम पुकार रहा हूं।
…( व्यवधान)
डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह : सब लोग एनपीए, एनपीए कहते हैं।...( व्यवधान) बड़े लोगों ने पैसा डुबा दिया।...( व्यवधान)उसमें कितने प्रतिशत पैसा गरीब लोगों ने लिया है और कितने प्रतिशत बड़े लोगों ने लिया है। ...( व्यवधान) इसका हिसाब भी होना चाहिए। यहां लोग घालमेल कर रहे हैं, यह सही नहीं है।...( व्यवधान)
सभापति महोदय : अब केवल श्री सेम्मलई की बात ही रिकार्ड में जाएगी।
...( व्यवधान)* SHRI S. SEMMALAI (SALEM): Mr. Chairman, thank you for giving me the opportunity to take part in the discussion. Many Members have expressed their views on the prevailing banking system in our country. I restrict my speech only in respect of the proposed amendments because it is an amending Bill.
The proposed Bill is aimed at conferring power on the Central Government, instead of the Reserve Bank of India and putting the Central Government in the place of RBI. What I understood on studying the proposed Bill is that the ownership of the State Bank passes on to the Central Government from RBI and the control of the State of India is being shifted from RBI to the Central Government. This Bill proposes to amend the provisions that earlier dealt with approvals and consultations with RBI on a number of administrative and technical issues. Now, through this proposed Bill the words ‘approval and consultation with the Central Government’ are incorporated. Technically it may be good and correct.
This august House should consider the status of RBI. RBI is an autonomous body and a very responsible body of the Central Government. It is also an expert body on all banking matters, and there is no doubt that the Reserve Bank of India is the foundation of the Indian economy. The Ministry may or may not have an expert head; but RBI must necessarily have an expert head.
In the present system there is efficiency in the RBI. The Finance Minister also knows this full well. The Government has full faith in the expert management of the RBI. Apparently, even now it is not out of the control of the Central Government also. Then what is the need of amending the provision? My apprehension is that if the Central Government, through the Ministry of Finance, is inducted to exercise day-to-day control in the working of the State Bank, it would certainly bring an element of political interference in the running of the State Bank and its subsidiaries.
Of course, whatever reasons are stated in the Statement of Object and Reasons, but political interference will definitely weaken the system and shake the basic structure of the institution. It will also certainly reduce the efficiency as we cannot expect the same efficiency if it is done. I also apprehend that the management of the State Bank of India will fail in the future.
I would like to make a suggestion here. If the Government is very particular in passing the amendment, then a provision should also be made to make the consultancy or recommendations of the RBI binding in all matters when the Central Government has to accord its final approval. If my suggestion is incorporated or taken into consideration, then normalcy of the RBI will continue and the basic structure will not be affected. I sincerely believe that the hon. Finance Minister will consider this suggestion of mine.
*SHRI PRASANTA KUMAR MAJUMDAR (BALURGHAT) : Respected Chairman Sir, I take the floor to oppose the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks Laws) Amendment Bill, 2009. From our very childhood, we have been knowing that the Reserve Bank of India and the Central Government are one and the same thing. Though RBI has some kind of identity and autonomy, this Bill proposes, “confer power on the Central Government instead of the Reserve Bank, but after consultation with the Reserve Bank ” – it means that the Government wants to usurp all powers of the RBI. The reason is that in this age of globalization the Government thinks it to be its bounden duty to pave the way for foreign commercial banks. We have nationalized banks, private banks, foreign banks and several other smaller banks in our country. The subsidiary banks function on regional basis and they really contribute a lot towards the economic development of their respective regions. These banks have been merged earlier also and even now the policy of merger is underway. Be it the Bank of Indore or the Bank of Surat, not much has been done for the prosperity of these institutions. The promises which were made for the benefit of the employees have not been fulfilled. Now the Government is trying to control the functioning of all these small entities. This is the reason why I am opposing this Bill and this was why the strike of bank employee was held on 5th August. It was a very successful strike which opposed the Government policy of hitting the banking sector hard. We all know that for economic prosperity of the nation, rural economy must be developed. Thus banks must be opened in the far-flung rural areas. There are 6 lacs villages in India. It was declared in the Budget speech that 73,000 branches of banks will be opened in the villages where the farming population is two thousand or more. But the ground reality is something different State Bank has * English translation of the speech originally delivered in Bengali.
huge premises to operate from but the poor farmers do not get loans from SBI. When they go to SBI for education loan, health loan or home loan, they have to run from pillar to post to get these sanctioned or are outright denied the facility. Only the well to do people are able to get credit from big public sector banks. Thus I want to say that this Bill is not for the benefit of the ordinary citizens of the country.
However the banking sector must be strengthened for steady progress of the country’s economy. For that we need village based banks which are rarely to be found. The banks in the villages do not have adequate number of employees. There is acute staff crunch which forces one or two employee to run the organisation with great difficulty. In this age of progress, this kind of situation cannot be allowed to continue.
Moreover, due to this legislation, there will be some legal complications. It means that if the powers of RBI are entrusted with the Central Government in consultation with the RBI then there will be dual authority which will lead to problems while fixing accountability. Therefore my suggestion is that in the rural areas, the local people should be involved more and more in the day to day functioning of the banks. In this way the banks will also learn to act responsibly and in the interest of its customers.
It is not that there rural banks are not doing anything at all. They are contributing to the well-being to the poor, common people no doubt, but the scope of their work must be expanded more so that people get the benefit of the banking system of the country. It is evident that the Government of India is highly in favour of foreign retail investments which may actually choke the small, indigenous, local traders to death. Be it Walmart, or Reliance or any other foreign companies – they are being invited to spread their network in India which will harm the interests of our business communities. The role of the banks is also dubious in this regard.
So my point is that the Bill which is being discussed here is not beneficial to the people of our country. The regional banks must also be given the right to thrive and prosper and with these words I thank you for allowing me to speak on this subject and conclude my speech.
SHRI NARAHARI MAHATO (PURULIA): Hon. Chairman, Sir, I thank you for giving me the chance to participate in the discussion relating to this legislation on the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banking Laws) Bill.
Many hon. Members have discussed about various aspects of the legislation. I rise to oppose the Bill.
There are some points which I would like mention here. The State Bank of India is a large institution, but the infrastructure of this institution in most of the rural areas in our country is not up to the expected level. Therefore, the State Bank of India has to develop its infrastructure in the rural areas keeping the welfare of the poor and common people in mind.
In the districts, there are only a few branches of the State Bank of India. There are no branches in most of the rural areas. In my district, Purulia, most of the blocks do not have the branches of the State Bank of India. Wherever the branches of the State Bank of India are there, they do not fulfill the demands of the people. There is not sufficient staff to take care of the welfare of the poor people.
We have seen a number of vacancies being created and the same being advertised. However, the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes are not being appointed for a long time in the vacant posts.
While developing the infrastructure of the State Bank of India, in the rural areas where the welfare of the people should be given priority, it is not going on properly. In the last Budget, our Finance Minister had assured that more branches of the State Bank of India will be opened, but till today not a single branch of the State Bank of India has been opened in my district.
A few days back, on the 5th of August, the employees of the State Bank of India and all other banks have gone on strike against misappropriation and deficiencies of the Government, and it has been completely successful. Whatever the Government has assured, they must do it.
I am of the opinion that the Government is declining educational loans to the youth.
There are many norms. People go to the bank for educational loans. A very few of them go regularly but the loans are not sanctioned. They are returned by mentioning some decision of the bank. Banks must endorse the social responsibility towards the common people of our country. The State Bank of India is not fulfilling the hundred per cent social responsibility of the country. That is my humble submission to you. This legislation will not ultimately render proper welfare of the common people of the rural areas. That is why, I again say that I oppose this Bill.
SHRI S.S. RAMASUBBU (TIRUNELVELI): Sir, it is an opportunity given to me to speak on the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks Laws) Amendment Bill, 2009. It is an important Bill. I support the Government regarding this Amendment Bill.
A sound financial management is essential for the development of a nation. ‘Money is the pivot around which the economic science clusters.’ This a Marshallian quotation. Our banking system is a very fine system and it is a world class system. It is because of that our Madam Shrimati Indiraji during 1969 nationalised 14 commercial banks. Our Communist Member, Shri Sampath has said that he has some apprehension as to whether it is going to be privatized. There is no need for this. Let him not be afraid of this. Let him not send this type of message among the people. Madam Indira Gandhi nationalized all the banks and we had a tremendous growth in the banking sector in our country. It is not only that. There are about ten lakh workers who are working there. The Communist people are not at all talking about the employees. They have forgotten it completely. We have given all the opportunity including the salary and other things.
We are having a financial crisis, the world over. Even in this crisis situation, our bank is standing high. We have faced the crisis. How? It is because of our banking system or the RBI system. We are having an apex bank the RBI. It is controlling all the nationalized banks. It is controlling it systematically. We are having an able Finance Minister in our country. We are having an apex bank, that is, the Reserve Bank. It is a controlling weapon. Monetary weapons are there to control not only all the commercial banks but the private banks, the foreign banks etc. All these are controlled by our banking system. It is properly being done. That is why, we are facing the crisis nowadays.
I want to say one more thing. … (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN : Since he is not yielding, please sit down.
… (Interruptions)
SHRI S.S. RAMASUBBU : I am not yielding. I am telling the fact. … (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Please sit down.
… (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Only the speech of Shri Ramasubbu would go on record and nothing else.
(Interruptions) …* SHRI S.S. RAMASUBBU : Sir, nowadays we have to face the competition of foreign banks. We need a fast, commercial bank with sound capital. In this regard, we should merge all the subsidiary banks of the State Bank with the State Bank of India. … (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Nothing will go on record except what Shri Ramasubbu says.
(Interruptions) …* SHRI S.S. RAMASUBBU: The rate of interest is very low and it is fixed by the RBI. Some provision should be there to have the differential interest rates. I would like to say that our Finance Minister should be cautious because he is fixing the interest rates. We are fixing the rate of interest; the RBI is controlling the rate of interest of the subsidiary banks. These interest rates should not be different for different banks. We have to be cautious. Some banks may fix higher rate of interest, and some may do it with a profit motive and fix such a rate. But we have to unanimously fix the interest rate; this is my suggestion here.
I want to say one more thing. All the Members were talking about NPA. Our Finance Minister says that the NPA is at the minimum level and there is no more NPA. But the credit should not be affected.
I want to tell one thing regarding NPA to our Finance Minister. It is a very important point. In the small scale industries, the banks are giving loans. The bank officers are doing assessments. The loans are given partially for the small scale industries – they give loans only for the machineries or for the buildings, but not for the vehicles. Some vehicles and trucks are necessary for the business. So, loans should be given in full; partial loans should not be given – loans for all the infrastructural facilities should be given; then only, it will be successful. This is the cause for the NPA. This is essential. The RBI should insist that all the banks have to properly follow this.
Then, I come to the education loan. It is very important because human resource development is essential for the development of the nation. Our Congress led-UPA Government is giving this loan facility to the students; it is a very important loan; most of the lower income people are getting this loan and are studying. Nowadays, easy education loan is given. The RBI should insist and say that this loan should be given to the lower income people easily.
Regarding recruitment of staff members, Khandelwal Committee has recommended this – ‘outsourcing of bank employees is not acceptable’. It says that outsourcing of bank employees should not be there. It is because we are sound; our banks are profitable; our staff members are doing devoted service; all the staff members of the bank are working very well. So, we have to recruit the staff members, even on compassionate ground. There are so many people who are waiting to get appointed. We have to give appointments on compassionate grounds also. We have to give opportunities to rural people to work in the banks. We have to give advance to the agricultural people also.
THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE (SHRI NAMO NARAIN MEENA): Sir, totally 13 hon. Members participated in the debate; and I am thankful to them for taking keen interest in the functioning of SBI and its subsidiary banks. I am grateful to them for their observations and valuable suggestions. I have taken note of the inputs which will be useful in improving the operational efficiency of the SBI group.
Before I respond to the main issues raised by the hon. Members, I would like to state that the consequential amendments under consideration today will confer powers on the Central Government after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India to approve increase or reduce of the authorised capital of the subsidiary bank, fixation of the issued capital of subsidiary banks by SBI, raising of issued capital by preferential allotment or private placements or public issue by the subsidiary banks, issuing the bonus shares to the existing equity shareholders, permitting the Chairman of the SBI to nominate the Chairman of the Board of subsidiary bank, appointments of the Managing Directors, etc. All the above measures will improve the functioning and increase the efficiency of the subsidiaries of the State Bank of India.
Now, I would like to respond to some of the main issues raised by the hon. Members. Several Members, including S/Shri Nishikant Dubey, Mahtab, Mazumdar, Sampath and Mandal, have raised the issue about the Government’s policy on bank mergers and consolidation. Here I would like to tell the hon. Members and the House that the current policy of the Government on consolidation leaves the initiative for consolidation to come from the management of the banks themselves with the Government playing a supportive role as the common shareholder. No directive on consolidation is being issued by the Government and the Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, the Government takes a decision in consultation with the RBI.
Sir, consolidation and merger is an on-going process. Here I would like to inform the House that there were 35 bank mergers since nationalisation of banks in 1969. Out of these, there were 25 bank mergers where the public sector banks have acquired the private sector banks. In two cases the public sector banks have acquired public sector banks and in eight instances private sector banks have acquired private sector banks.
Members, S/Shri Dubey, Mandal, Sampath and Mahtab, have also raised the issue about the experience of merger of Saurashtra Bank and Indore Bank. Sir, the experience of the bank has been satisfactory in both the cases. A large number of employees working in the administrative offices of the subsidiary banks have been redeployed in business development areas. Employees of these two merged banks have benefited from the improved superannuation benefits.
Shri Nishikant Dubey has raised a vital point about the autonomy of the subsidiary banks. Sir, I would like to inform him that all the associated banks have full autonomy in their day-to-day operations to conduct the business of banking in areas such as to sanction and disburse loans and advances subject to prudential limits set by the RBI in this regard and in the matters of investment, opening of branches, launching of new products suitable to their areas of operation and recruitment of staff.
A large number of Members have highlighted the asset quality or the Non Performing Assets of SBI and its subsidiaries. Sir, there has been an increase in the NPAs over the last two years. However, the Members will agree with me that there were some pressing reasons for this.
Due to the impact of the global economic crises and the indifferent monsoon, increasing levels of strain have been felt by the different segments of the Indian economy since September/October, 2008. During the global financial crises, public sector banks did a commendable job in meeting the credit requirements of the economy at a time when the private sector banks and foreign banks had practically stopped extending credit. During 2008-09, the advances of public sector banks increased to over 25 per cent as against 10 per cent by private sector banks and around four per cent by foreign banks.
During the financial year, 2010-11, major causes of increase in NPAs of SBI were slippages in agriculture and corporate sector. Further, there were slippages in the restructured accounts also. But the NPAs are being closely monitored. Immediately upon an account turning NPA, the prospects of rehabilitation and restructuring the dues is looked at. In cases where rehabilitation is not possible, actions are initiated, such as, action under SARFAESI Act; action under DRT or civil suits in civil courts; close follow up for recovery of dues including recovery under one time settlement or compromise; and follow up with the BIFR/DRT etc. for expeditious disposals.
Sir, Mr. Nishikant Dubey has raised an issue about non-implementation of some provisions of the State Bank of India Act, amendment of 2007. The amendments were made in the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959 in the year 2007. Pursuant to the said amendments in the Act, the regulations were required to be amended. The amended regulations were forwarded to the RBI for its prior approval. However, the RBI has advised that consequential amendments which are being taken up today are under consideration of the Parliament and therefore it would be proper to wait for the amendments to be passed before the regulations can be framed.
Several Members have referred to the performance of the SBI. I would like to tell some of the performance parameters of the bank. It has a total number of 13698 branches with all of them under the CBS platform, all are 100 per cent computerised. The total rural branches as on 31st March, 2011 are 4973. An important statistics is that of the total 21646 rural branches of public sector banks and private sector banks, almost 23 per cent are SBI branches. You will find that every fourth bank in the rural areas is a State Bank of India branch. It means that roughly every fourth rural branch is an SBI branch in the rural areas. Members will agree with me that the commercial viability in rural areas is less as compared to cities.
The priority sector advances of the State Bank of India have been 42 per cent against the target of 40 per cent which has been given to banks.
Sir, few Members have raised the question about the vacancy position and recruitment of people belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe communities. The good news for them is that -- I would like to tell Shri Mahato and Shri Sampat, since they have asked this question specifically – the backlog for SC, ST and OBC and persons with disabilities identified up to 31.12.2009 is nil in State Bank of India. Regarding the vacancies I would like to submit, yes, there are vacancies. In the clerical cadre the vacancies are 5500 and in officers cadre the vacancy position is 2007. The recruitment is already underway and I would like to assure them that the reservation policy of Government of India for recruitment of SC, ST and OBC will be complied with and all banks will do the required formalities.
Sir, regarding the profitability of the bank, the net profit of State Bank of India has been Rs. 8265 crore in the year 2010-11. Shri Dubey and Shri Mahtab had asked about pension. Amendment to the SBI Pension Rules has been framed and the concurrence of the RBI has been taken. The rules are now under consideration and examination of the Government. After concurrence, the Government rules will be notified by the SBI.
Shri Rao has raised the question as to why the banks do not lend directly to the priority sector borrowers at a regulated rate of interest rather than through micro finance institutions. As per the new RBI guideline only specified and regulated lending to MFI would be allowed as priority sector lending. The conditions include amount of loan and the rate of interest. The SBI lending direct to Self-help Groups was Rs. 13,496 crore whereas to MFIs was Rs. 1,878 crore. He again raised the point that the banks should be well capitalised so that the loans are given to poor. To ensure that the public sector banks are adequately capitalised, the Government has recently provided capital infusion to some of our banks.
Shri Mahtab raised a question whether the retired employees of the State Bank of India, State Bank of Saurashtra and the State Bank of Indore are covered under the new pension rules. Retired employees of State Bank of Saurashtra and the State Bank of Indore will also be covered by the pension rules. The Government has already approved the amendments to the SBI pension rules. This will be notified by the State Bank of India.
Shri Panda raised the point that this Bill will open way for privatisation. This Bill is not concerned with privatisation. The provisions of the Bill are merely consequential amendments due to change in ownership of SBI from RBI to the Central Government. I would like to clarify that the Government does not intend to privatise our Public Sector Banks.
शैलेन्द्र कुमार जी, पांडा जी, रधुवंश प्रसाद जी और कई माननीय सदस्यों ने फाइनेंशियल इन्कलूजन की बात कही है। मैं बताना चाहता हूं कि माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी ने पिछले भाषण में बताया था कि देश में 73000 ऐसे गांव हैं जिनकी जनसंख्या 2000 है या उससे अधिक है उनमें बैंकिंग फैसिलिटीज किसी भी मोड से, चाहे बिजनेस करेस्पोंडेन्ट है, मार्च, 2012 तक हम पहुंचायेंगे। इस साल अब तक 29 हजार गांवों को कवर कर लिया गया है और बैंकों ने हमें एश्योर किया है कि मार्च 2012 तक 73 हजार गावों में बैंकिंग फैसिलिटीज बिजनेस करेस्पोन्डेंट के तहत पहुंच जायेगी।
16.00 hrs. (Dr. Girija Vyas in the Chair) अल्पसंख्यकों के ऋण के बारे में भी जिक्र किया गया था। हम वीकर सैक्शंस को जो लोन देते हैं, उसमें 15 परसैन्ट का टारगेट दिया हुआ है। इसे हमने रिव्यू किया था, अभी माइनोरिटीज को 14.16 परसैन्ट दिया जा रहा है। माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी ने सभी बैंकों के सीएमडीज को निर्देश दिया है कि इस फाइनेंशियल ईयर में 15 परसैन्ट के टारगेट को पूरा करें।
जहां तक श्री रघुवंश प्रसाद जी तथा अन्य माननीय सदस्यों ने यह सवाल उठाये हैं...( व्यवधान)
श्री शैलेन्द्र कुमार : अल्पसंख्यकों का जो टारगेट रखा गया था, वह पूरा नहीं हुआ है।
श्री नमोनारायन मीणा : अल्पसंख्यकों के बारे में मैंने बताया कि यह 14.16 परसैन्ट हो चुका है, 15 परसैन्ट टारगेट रखा हुआ है, जो इस फाइनेंशियल ईयर में पूरा हो जायेगा। पहले यह 9 और 10 परसैन्ट था, लेकिन बढ़ाते-बढ़ाते अब 15 परसैन्ट पर आ गया है। हमें सरकार से जो आदेश मिले हैं, उससे यह पूरा हो जायेगा, मैं इस बारे में आपको एश्योर करता हूं। ...( व्यवधान) जो 15 परसैन्ट का टारगेट रखा गया है, यह पूरा हो जायेगा।
जहां तक शिक्षा ऋण का सवाल है, शिक्षा ऋण दिया जा रहा है। हम करीबन 41 हजार करोड़ रुपये का शिक्षा ऋण दे चुके हैं। यह बात महताब जी और पांडा साहब ने भी कही कि हमारी बहुत बड़ी जनसंख्या बैंकिंग नेटवर्क से एक्सक्लूडेड है, यह बात मैं मानता हूं। इसीलिए भारत सरकार ने स्वाभिमान अभियान शुरू किया है। माननीय सोनिया गांधी जी ने उसे फरवरी में लांच किया था। इसका यही मतलब है कि ज्यादा से ज्यादा लोगों तक रीच पहुंचे, हर हाउसहोल्ड का खाता खोला जाए। अकेले स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया ने एक करोड़ नो फ्रिल एकाउंट्स खोले हैं। पहले खाता खोलने के लिए बैंक्स इंसिस्ट किया करते थे कि पांच सौ या हजार रुपये जमा कराओ, क्योंकि खाता खोलने में यह कास्ट आती है, इसलिए लोग जमा कराते थे। लेकिन अभी आरबीआई ने डायरेक्शंस लिबरेलाइज कर दिये हैं कि आप नो फ्रिल एकाउंट खोलिये, जीरो बैलेंस पर भी खाते खोलिये। अकेले स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया की मेरे पास सूचना है कि अकेले स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया ने एक करोड़ खाते खोले हैं।...( व्यवधान)
श्री अर्जुन राम मेघवाल (बीकानेर):मेरे पास शिकायतें आई हैं कि आर.बी.आई. की गाइडलाइंस होने के बावजूद भी कई बैंक्स खाते नहीं खोल रहे हैं। मेरे पास बहुत सी रिपोर्ट्स हैं।
श्री नमोनारायन मीणा : अगर नहीं खोल रहे हैं तो आप स्पेसिफिक बताइयेगा। आरबीआई की इस बारे में डायरेक्शंस हैं कि सबके खाते खोले जाएं।
सभापति महोदया: माननीय सदस्य आप आपस में बातें न करें, चेयर को एड्रैस करें, मंत्री महोदय, आप भी चेयर को एड्रैस करें।
SHRI NAMO NARAIN MEENA : Instructions have been given to all the banks. If there is any complaint, kindly bring it to my notice and we will again give instructions to all the banks.
मैं समझता हूं कि करीब-करीब सभी माननीय सदस्यों के सवालों के हमने जवाब दे दिये हैं। वैसे बहुत सारे प्वाइंट्स रेज किये गये हैं, जो हम लोगों को अपनी एफिशिएंसी में लगेगा और उनके ऊपर सरकार विचार करेगी।
With these words, I commend the Bill for consideration of the House.
… (Interruptions)
MADAM CHAIRMAN : No questions are allowed.
… (Interruptions)
SHRI PRABODH PANDA (MIDNAPORE): Madam Chairman, we are not satisfied with the reply of the hon. Minister. We are against this Bill. So, in protest, we are walking out of the House.… (Interruptions)
16.04 hrs At this stage, Shri Prabodh Panda, Dr.Raghuvansh Prasad Singh and some other hon. Members left the House MADAM CHAIRMAN: The question is:
“That the Bill further to amend the State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956 and the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959, be taken into consideration.” The motion was adopted.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: The House will now take up clause by clause consideration of the Bill.
The question is:
“That clause 2 stand part of the Bill.” The motion was adopted.
Clause 2 was added to the Bill.
Clause 3 Amendment of Section 10 Amendment made: Page 2,for lines 11 to 13, substitute – ‘(b) in sub-section (3), -- (i) for the words “with the approval of the State Bank and the Reserve Bank”, the words “with the approval of the State Bank and the Central Government in consultation with the Reserve Bank” shall be substituted; (ii) for the words “public issue”, the words “public issue or rights issue” shall be substituted;’. (3) (Shri Namo Narain Meena) MADAM CHAIRMAN : The question is: “That clause 3, as amended, stand part of the Bill”. The motion was adopted. Clause 3, as amended, was added to the Bill. Clause 4 was added to the Bill. Clause 5 Amendment of Section 7 Amendment made: Page 2,for lines 31 to 33, substitute – ‘(b) in sub-section (4), -- (i) for the words “with the approval of the State Bank and the Reserve Bank”, the words “with the approval of the State Bank and the Central Government in consultation with the Reserve Bank” shall be substituted; (ii) for the words “public issue”, the words “public issue or rights issue” shall be substituted;’. (4) (Shri Namo Narain Meena) MADAM CHAIRMAN: The question is : “That clause 5, as amended, stand part of the Bill”. The motion was adopted. Clause 5, as amended, was added to the Bill. Clauses 6 to 9 were added to the Bill. Clause 10 Amendment of Section 63 -Power of subsidiary banks to make regulation Amendment made: Page 3, for lines 42 to 49, substitute -- ’10. For section 63 of the principal Act, the following section shall be substituted, namely:--
“63.(1) The Board of Directors of a subsidiary bank section 63. Regulations may, after consultation with the State Bank and the Reserve Bank and with the previous approval of the Central Government, By Notification in the official Gazette, make regulations not inconsistent with this Act and the rules made thereunder, to provide for all matters for which provision is necessary or expedient for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of this Act or any other law for the time being in force. (2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such regulations may provide for –
(a) the powers and duties of the managing director of the subsidiary Bank;
(b) the fees and allowances which may be paid to directors or others for attending any meetings of the board of Directors or of its committees (including the executive committee) or other committees or for attending to any other work of the subsidiary bank;
(c) the time and place at which, and the manner in which the business of the Board of Directors of the subsidiary bank shall be transacted and the procedure to be followed at the meetings thereof;
(d) the constitution of the executive committee of the subsidiary bank and the conditions and limitations subject to which the executive committee may exercise its powers and the procedure to be followed at the meetings thereof;
(e) the formation of any other committees, whether of the Board of Directors of the subsidiary bank or otherwise, and The delegation of powers and functions of the Board to such Committees and the conduct of business in such committees;
(f) the nature of shares of the subsidiary bank, the manner in which, and the conditions subject to which, shares may be held and transferred and generally all matters relating to the rights and duties of shareholders;
(g) the procedure for issuing the certificates of shares;
(h) the procedure with respect to increase, whether by public issue or rights issue or by preferential allotment or private placement, the issued capital by issue of equity or preference shares;
(i) the manner of acceptance of share money in instalments, the manner of making calls and the manner of forfeiture of unpaid shares and their re-issue;
(j) the maintenance of share registers, and the particulars to be entered in such registers in addition to those specified in sub-section (1) of section 21, the safeguards to be observed in the maintenance of the register of shareholders on computer floppies or diskettes or any other electronic form, the inspection and closure of the registers and all other matters connected therewith;
(k) the manner in which every individual registered shareholder nominate, and individual to whom all his rights in the shares shall vest in the event of this death under sub-section (1) of section 18A;
(l) the manner in which, the joint holders may nominate an individual to whom all their rights in the shares shall vest in the death of all the joint holders under sub-section (2) of section 18A;
(m) the manner in which nomination is varied or cancelled under sub-section (3) of the section 18A;
(n) the manner in which every individual registered as the holder of the shares to make nomination where nominee is a minor to appoint, any person to become entitled to the shares in the event of his death during the minority of the nominee under sub-section (4) of section 18A;
(o) the holding and conduct of elections under this Act and the final determination of doubts or disputes regarding the qualifications of candidates for election or regarding the validity of elections;
(p) the manner in which general meeting shall be convened, the procedure to be followed threat and the manner in which voting rights may be exercised;
(q) the manner in which notices may be served on behalf of the subsidiary bank upon shareholders or other persons;
(r) the payment of dividends including interim dividends;
(s) the delegation of powers and functions of the Board of Directors of the subsidiary bank to the managing director or directors or officers or other employees of that bank;
(t) the conditions and limitations subject to which the subsidiary bank may appoint officers, advisers and other employees and fix their remuneration and other terms and conditions of service;
(u) the duties and conduct of officers, advisers and other employees of the subsidiary bank;
(v) the establishment and maintenance of superannuation, pension, provident or other funds for the benefit of the officers or employees of the subsidiary bank or of the dependants of such officers or employees or for the purposes of the subsidiary bank, and the granting of superannuation allowances, annuities and pensions payable out of any such fund;
(w) the conduct and defence of legal proceedings by or against the subsidiary bank and the manner of signing pleadings;
(x) the provision of a seal for the subsidiary bank and the manner and effect of its use;
(y) the form and manner in which contracts binding on the subsidiary bank may be executed;
(z) the conditions and requirements subject to which loans or advances may be made or bills may be discounted or purchased by the subsidiary bank; (za) the conditions subject to which loans or advances may be made by the subsidiary bank to its directors or officers or the relatives of such directors of officers or to companies, firms or individuals with which or with whom such directors or officers or relatives are connected as partners, directors, managers, servants, shareholders or otherwise;
(zb) the persons or authorities who shall administer any pension, provident or other fund constituted for the benefit of the officers or employees of the subsidiary bank or their dependants or for the purpose of that bank; (zc) the circumstances in which the specific approval of the State Bank shall be required to the grant of loans and advances or investment of funds by the subsidiary bank or to any contract, arrangement or proposal entered into or proposed to be entered into by the subsidiary bank;
(zd) the preparation and submission to the State Bank and the Reserve Bank of statements of programmes of activities and financial statements of the subsidiary bank and the periods for which, and the time within which such statements and estimates are to be prepared and submitted;
(ze) the person or persons in the State Bank by whom any powers, duties or functions conferred, imposed or entrusted on or to the State Bank under this Act may be exercised or performed;
(zf) generally, for the efficient conduct of the affairs of the subsidiary bank.
(3) All regulations made under this section shall have effect From such earlier or later date as may be specified in the Regulations.
(4) Every regulation shall, as soon as may be after it is made Under this section by the Board of Directors of a subsidiary Bank, be forwarded to the Central Government and that Government shall cause a copy of the same to be laid before each House of Parliament, while it is in session, for a total period of thirty days, which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session immediately following the session or the successive sessions aforesaid, both Houses agree in making any modification in the regulation or both Houses agree that the regulation should not be made, the regulation shall thereafter have effect only in such modified form or be of no effect, as the case may be; so however, that any such modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under that regulation.”.’. (5)
(Shri Namo Narain Meena) MADAM SPEAKER: The question is:
“That Clause 10, as amended, stand part of the Bill”.
The motion was adopted.
Clause 10, as amended, was added to the Bill.
Clause 1 Short Title and Commencement Amendment made: Page 1, line 5, -- for “2009” substitute “2011”. (2) (Shri Namo Narain Meena) MADAM CHAIRMAN: The question is: “That Clause 1, as amended, stand part of the Bill”. The motion was adopted. Clause 1, as amended, was added to the Bill. Enacting Formula Amendment made: Page 1, line 1, -- for “Sixtieth” substitute “Sixty-second”. (1) (Shri Namo Narain Meena) MADAM CHAIRMAN: The question is: “That Enacting Formula, as amended, stand part of the Bill”. The motion was adopted. Enacting Formula, as amended, was added to the Bill. The Long Title was added to the Bill. MADAM CHAIRMAN : The Minister may now that the Bill, as amended, be passed. SHRI NAMO NARAIN MEENA: Madam, I beg to move: “That the Bill, as amended, be passed.” MADAM CHAIRMAN: Motion moved: “That the Bill, as amended, be passed.”
श्री निशिकांत दुबे : मंत्री जी ने जो जवाब दिया है उससे संतुष्ट नहीं होते हुए भी मैं कबीर का एक दोहा कहना चाहता हूँ - देख परायी चूपड़ी, मत ललचाए जीभ, रूखी-सूखी खाय के, ठण्डा पानी पी। जिए एनपीए के बारे में आपने इतना बोला है, एनपीए एकाउन्टिग के दोष के कारण भले ही 72-75 हजार करोड़ रूपये दिखाई दे रहा है, परंतु वह लगभग 1.5 लाख करोड़ रूपये से ऊपर है। हमने यह कहा था कि आप जो इन्ट्रेस्ट रेट बढ़ा रहे हैं, इससे एनपीए और बढ़ेगा।
इसके बारे में सरकार ने स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया को क्या कहा है और एनपीए न बढ़े, इसके लिए सरकार क्या प्रयास कर रही है? यह हमने आपसे पूछा था, इसका सरकार के पास क्या जवाब है?
SHRI NAMO NARAIN MEENA: The policy is same for all the banks. A separate order cannot be given only for the State Bank of India. As I have said earlier, the Minister of Finance has also directed the CMDs of all the banks and the RBI has also given some instructions to all the banks to reduce their NPAs. They are making all-out efforts to reduce their NPAs. I told you also in my reply as to what were the reasons of increase of NPAs. I also told in an earlier question in this very House that the gross NPA is less than three per cent which is acceptable. … (Interruptions)
सभापति महोदया : मिनिस्टर साहब ने क्लियर कर दिया है।
…( व्यवधान)
श्री निशिकांत दुबे : आरबीआई के डिप्टी गवर्नर मिस्टर चक्रवर्ती स्वयं कह रहे हैं कि इंट्रेस्ट रेट बढ़ने से एनपीए बढ़ेगा।
MADAM CHAIRMAN: The question is:
“That the Bill, as amended, be passed.” The motion was adopted.