Raipur, ( thestates.news ) Neither I am against private sector nor I would like to compromise public welfare. Private sector expertise and capabilities should be used by the state to improve productivity and efficiency. After all, public sector alone cannot drive the development engine of such a vast nation. While the PSU can monitor the optimum utilization of limited resources for the leakage and welfare of project-affected people, private institutions can supply speed and capability often not found in government-controlled systems.
For example, the Center allocated natural resources to public sector units (PSUs) to avoid corruption and to benefit everyone. But the question is- Is the public sector unit able to extend the benefit of mining on all its properties to all the stakeholders of that property? The Supreme Court has given the answer: no. According to a study by PRS Legislative Research (Ref: http://prsindia.org/parliamenttrack/budgets/chhattisgarh-budget-analysis-2019-20), Chhattisgarh estimated a revenue surplus of Rs 4,445 crore in the 2018-19 budget. However, it was found that this surplus turned into a revenue deficit of Rs 6,342 crore as per revised estimates for 2018-19. This means that the people of Chhattisgarh lost Rs 10,787 crore directly. With this money, the government would easily buy paddy at the MSP rate of Rs 2500 per quintal for the farmers. Who is to blame for this? PSUs operating in the state are not only denying mineral royalties due to Chhattisgarh but have also halved capital investments and direct recruitments through contractual hiring and outsourcing in the state during last 3 years alone. This is unforgivable.
Clearly, giving PSU a free rein only because it is a PSU can no longer work. The solution is to enlist the help of technical and business expertise from the private sector through fair and transparent competition who will be both efficient as well as accountable in providing the social and economic benefits of the project to the last person standing in the last line. In recent times, we have seen the results given by the progressive MDO (mine developer and operator) model. Admittedly, it can be made more effective. If state governments, as legal representatives of local stakeholders, can legislate clear standards for employment, socio-economic benefits and environmental protection for local stakeholders, then surely everyone in Chhattisgarh and other mineral-rich states will not only benefit but also escape the curse of lop-sided development that I call ‘rich land, poor people’. Improved tax and revenue from royalties from private participation can be used for improving healthcare and education infrastructure among other government programmes for public welfare.
If we want to attract higher tax revenues, recruitments and royalties to improve our financial condition- i.e., make us rich people in a rich land- states should promote investment by both the public and private sectors.
