Demands That PC Explain His Inaction On Loss
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
New Delhi: The Prime Minister’s Office and the PM himself have been put in the dock by the public accounts committee (PAC) in the 2G scam for their inaction despite former telecom minister A Raja leaving no doubt about his plans to go ahead with the controversial allocation of spectrum which has now blown up into a major scam.
Raja, the PAC pointed out, was not stopped despite his writing a letter to the PM on December 26, 2007 spelling out his intention and awarding the licences within just 15 days of that. In its draft PAC report, prepared by the committee chairman BJP’s Murli Manohar Joshi, the focus is sharply kept on the PMO. Indeed, there are places in the report where the distinction between the PM and his office blurs.
The strictures may appear ironical, given Singh having volunteered to appear before the very same committee.
The report also takes to task then finance minister P Chidambaram who it says in his note dated January 15, 2008 acknowledged that spectrum is a scarce resource and the price of spectrum be based on its scarcity value but made “the unique and condescending suggestion that the matter be treated as closed.’’
It says Chidambaram, despite being guardian of the public exchequer, did not initiate stringent and swift action against those responsible for this loss.
PACKING A PUNCH
On PM & PMO
The PM’s desire to keep the PMO at arms length indirectly helped the telecom minister to go ahead and execute his unfair, arbitrary and dubious designs
The “strange sequence of events” (exchange of letters between PM, Raja, Pranab and actions within PMO)
“testifies to some unfortunate omissions. On Jan 3, 2008, by just acknowledging the minister’s (Raja’s) letter, the PM seemed to have given an indirect green signal (for Raja) to go ahead with his plan and decisions”
When the communications minister was in “such a hurry to implement his decision, there was no plausible reason (for the PMO) to submit the file to the PM after 12 days”
If it is not the duty of the PMO or cabinet secretariat to enforce cabinet decisions... “who else is entrusted with this responsibility?”
On P Chidambaram
PAC “shocked & dismayed” that FM (Chidambaram) acknowledged spectrum was scarce but made a “unique and condescending suggestion that the matter be treated as closed”. It must be probed; he must explain to the nation reasons for “such an unusual act” On Goolam Vahanvati
PAC’s come to the
“inescapable, firm”
conclusion that DoT and then solicitor general Vahanvati were “equally
responsible for favouring Swan by circumventing due procedure”... He must explain why he prevented DoT from referring matter to ministry of corporate affairs
On Shahid Balwa
A former CMD, BSNL, and a telecom expert deposed before the committee. When asked why BSNL signed a memorandum of understanding with Swan on Oct 13, 2008, for intra circle roaming, he said:
“Swan is special.” ‘Raja ignored Swan’s ineligibility for licence’ New Delhi: It questions the conduct of then solicitor general GE Vahanvati for not referring the Swan Telecom ownership structure to the corporate affairs ministry. There is now widespread admission of the fact that Reliance ADAG group owned Swan and that made it ineligible for 2G licences, something that was ignored by Raja.
The report dwells at length on PMO’s role which at times comes across as a victim of deception, and, at other, a reluctant or ineffectual enforcer of rules. It says in the fight between the ministries of law and telecom on whether the spectrum price issue needed to be referred to an empowered group of ministers, the PM sided with the latter: a decision which allowed Raja to have his way.
It refers to the sequence of events leading to Raja implementing his version of “first come, first served” policy to benefit select telecom players for alleged bribes. A good 12 days after Raja sent his December 26, 2007 letter to the PMO, a note was submitted to the PM. And the PM responded to it only after the licences had been awarded.
With Raja winning the day, the PM in a letter on January 15, 2008, distanced himself from the 2G issue that turned into a major scam. His desire to do so was put on record by his PS who wrote “Prime Minister wants this informally shared with the department (of telecom) and does not want a formal communication and wants PMO to be at arms length.” The reference seems to indicate the PM’s wish to keep the communication off files.
This desire on the part of the PM helped Raja to go ahead and execute his “unfair, arbitrary and dubious designs,” the draft report says. The committee found no plausible reason to submit the file to the PM after 12 days, given that Raja was rushing to allot licences. It also questioned the PM’s defence that he had asked Raja to factor indevelopments (a reference to growing chrous of complaints) concerning the distribution of licences.
No comments:
Post a Comment