People's Democracy(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) |
Vol. XXXIV
No.
33 August 15, 2010 |
THE WEEK IN
PARLIAMENT
Subhas Ray
ON price rise
issue, the parliament
witnessed a stalemate for a couple days, as the entire opposition
insisted on a
discussion, censoring the government for its failure to contain the
price rise.
The entire week beginning July 26 was lost due to the government’s
non-acceptance of the demand. At last, the government bowed down,
proposing
that a motion be passed in both houses on the adverse impacts of
inflationary
pressure on our economy and the common man. This way the opposition did
force the
government to take action on price front.
During the
discussion on
the motion, CPI(M) leader Sitaram Yechury participated in Rajya Sabha
and Basudeb
Acharia in Lok Sabha. Excerpts from Yechury’s speech have already been
printed.
DISCUSSION
ON
PRICE RISE
In Lok Sabha,
Basudeb
Acharia referred to the successful all-India bandh, saying the people
came to
the street to protest against the rising prices. Food inflation had
reached a high
of 17 per cent. When the prices of almost all essential commodities
were
increasing, the government dealt a blow to the people by raising the
prices of
petrol, diesel, kerosene and LPG. This would have a cascading effect on
all
fronts
To rub salt
to injury, moreover,
the ministry of petroleum and natural gas issued big, full-page ads to
justify
the increase in and deregulation of the petro-product prices. Amid
interruptions, Acharia termed the advertisement as a document of
deceit. Quoting
the facts and figures regarding the international crude prices, Acharya
showed
that since the UPA government came to power in May 2009, the price of
crude in
the international market had increased by only 70 paise per litre, but
the government
had increased the price per litre of petrol by Rs 6.44, of kerosene by
Rs 4.55,
and of LPG by Rs 35 per cylinder in the last six months. So, the
government’s
argument linking the petro-product prices to the international crude
price is
not based on facts. Acharia also said the oil marketing companies are
not
incurring losses; rather they are earning profits. As for increased
taxes on
petroleum products, they would give the government Rs 1,20,000 crore
during
2010-11. But the minister, through the ad, claimed the burden of
subsidy was Rs
53,000 crore.
What does the
GDP growth
mean to the people who go to bed without food as they do not have the
purchasing
power, Acharia asked. Drawing attention to the 1943 famine in
Supporting
Acharia, Khagen
Das, CPI(M), demanded rollback of the increased petro-product prices.
Future
trading in all agricultural commodities must be banned. Stringent
action is
needed against the hoarders of essential commodities. The public
distribution
system must be universalised and the BPL-APL division scrapped.
On the
discussion on supplementary
demands for grants (general) 2010-11, the CPI(M)’s P Karunakaran said
while the
government claimed a GDP growth rate of 7.4 per cent, the picture was
frustrating in many sectors. India is an agricultural country, but
agriculture grew
only by 0.2 per cent whereas the growth of population is about 1.8 per
cent.
Thus the food security is at stake. The production of foodgrains has
fallen by
7.5 per cent in 2009-10 over the last year. The trade deficit is
widening and
it is expected to be 9 per cent by 2010-11 end. The situation with
regard to
the agricultural workers, peasants and artisans is quite serious. Job
growth
rate is lowest in the last three decades. The government has taken a
drastic
step of disinvesting the public sector; Rs 25,000 crore worth of their
equity
has been sold. It has decided to sell equity worth Rs 40,000 crore
again. But selling
the public assets to private hands for a song is contrary to the
national
interest. Therefore, the government should stop this selling spree.
Karunakaran
also spoke of the
discrimination meted out to Kerala in regard to food allocation and
urged to
restore its food quota of 2007. As far as electricity allocation is
concerned,
earlier the allocated quota for Kerala was 1,400 megawatt but now the
state is
getting only 641 megawatt. There is a long pending demand for opening
an IIT in
the state which is the first state to have achieved 100 per cent
literacy, he
reminded.
OTHER
ISSUES
During the
discussion on
the Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Bill 2010 in
Rajya
Sabha, Brinda Karat said that, unfortunately, the major portion of the
bill was
devoted to issues of registration but there was very little in the bill
about the
regulation aspect. The only clause related to regulation was of
mandatory
admission of patients in medical emergency. But there is no provision
for any
penalty if an establishment refuses to do so. There are many loopholes
in it, and
so we cannot call it a regulatory mechanism. As some laws already
exist, and
they are much more stringent in regard to regulation than the proposed
bill, what
was going to be the fate of those acts? The bill did not deal with the
prices.
Why cannot the parliament decide it? There are huge differences in
charges between
different hospitals for the same treatment. This bill in no way tackles
this
question of unethical medical practices. Another point is related to
the company
owner who is not to be held liable under the new law. An employee will
be fined
but not the owner. We are providing so many concessions to the big
corporate
hospitals; so why cannot this law mandate them to reserve 25 to 30 per
cent of
the beds for the poor? The need is to improve the poor people’s access
to health
facilities, Brinda Karat said.
Lok Sabha has
passed the
Securities and Insurance Laws (Amendment and Validation) Bill 2010.
Rising to
speak on it, the CPI(M)’s Saidul Haque demanded that the bill be sent
to the standing
committee for a detailed discussion. Opposing the ordinance issued
earlier, he
said the dispute began in January this year, and should have been
brought to
the parliament which was in session up to May 7. Secondly, the minister
of
state for finance had stated in Rajya Sabha that the government had
asked the
two regulators to get a legal opinion on the issue. But when the matter
was still
before the Supreme Court, why was an ordinance promulgated, he asked. Why must the IRDA, rather than SEBI, regulate
the ULIPs? The SEBI had directed 14 insurance companies to stop dealing
in
ULIPs because the amount received under ULIP is invested in the
securities
market. Our question is: why should they invest in the securities
market a part
of premium of an insurance linked scheme? Rather it should be invested
in
developing the social sector. The RBI had constituted two committees.
One was a
standing body, the Technical Advisory Committee in Financial
Regulation,
constituted to identify the sources and nature of potential conflicts
and
suggest possible measures for mitigating them. Then, there is a high
level committee
on capital and financial market. So the RBI should have played a key
role. As
for the Provident Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA),
itself
constituted under an executive order, why was it kept in the joint
mechanism? The
first committee could go into the details of the issue and got to the
root of
this kind of conflicts, to safeguard the investor’s interest. At the
same time,
we are very much concerned that the insurance related schemes must not
invest
funds in the stock market.
Rajya Sabha
has passed the
Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Bill 2009. During the discussion, Tapan
Kumar
Sen, CPI(M), conveyed his thanks for accepting his amendment. He said
this was a
small weapon in the hands of the poor contract workers to get things
done. In
respect of wage ceiling of Rs 10,000 as on today, it does not mean
anything.
The question of putting ceiling in the matter of industrial disputes is
absolutely superfluous and the concerned clause needed to be deleted.
The Works
Committee was not appointed in 99 per cent cases. But no employer has
been
prosecuted for it. As regards supervisors, the employers take away
their rights
in majority of the industries. That is to be taken care of. Similarly,
in the
matter of grievance redressal machinery, the lacuna regarding the
number of
employees needs to be properly addressed. The award of the tribunal
must be
implemented in a fixed timeframe. The Industrial Dispute Act is to be
implemented by the labour department, but the labour department is not
responsible to address the labour problems in the SEZs. The labour
issues have
to be dealt by the labour department and the latter needs to be
strengthened if
the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act have to be meaningfully
implemented.
Rajya Sabha
witnessed
ruckus over the alleged diversion of funds from the welfare schemes
meant for
the scheduled castes and tribes to the Commonwealth Games. Lashing out
at the government,
Brinda Karat said Rs 744 crore allocated for the Special Component Plan
of
Delhi government for dalits had been diverted. What has been done
openly in
Delhi violates the in which constitutional rights of dalit masses who
have been
deprived of the money allocated for them. This is a sort of economic
atrocity,
she sharply accused. A large chunk of contract labourers working in
Delhi belongs
to the scheduled castes and tribes. The minimum wage in Delhi is Rs 203
per day
but these labourers get just Rs 100 a day. The speaker demanded return
of Rs
744 crore along with interest, legal and constitutional provisions for
the
component plan in place of the executive order, and stern action
against the
guilty in the meantime.