http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Under-fire-Jindal-attacks-TV-crew/articleshow/16345221.cms
Under fire, Jindal attacks TV crew
TNN | Sep 11, 2012,
NEW DELHI: Industrialist and Congress MP Naveen Jindal on Monday manhandled a news channel team after it asked some uncomfortable questions on the coal block allocation issue. Following the incident, Jindal remained unavailable for comment even as the Congress apologized on behalf of the party.
The incident took place when a team of journalists from Zee News caught up with the owner of Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (JSPL) at a function in Le Meridien hotel. The channel claimed that its reporter sought clarifications from Jindal on the allegations levelled against his company in the coal block scam.
However, Jindal got upset at the questioning and first asked the reporter about his professional antecedents. When the reporter identified himself, the Congress MP first refused to talk to the channel, saying, "Zee News has been showing all rubbish on its channel."
On being told that some other channels had also taken up the issue, he lost his cool. The channel claimed an angry Jindal pushed the cameraperson and asked threateningly, "What is this, why are you coming to this programme... what are you doing?"
Jindal is facing heat after it came to light that JPL, a subsidiary of JSPL, was the first Indian power company to operate on a "merchant power" basis, which allowed it to sell electricity at a market rate that was higher than the rate at which power regulators fixed tariff for companies selling power to states through long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs).
Zee News editor Sudhir Chaudhary said, "We have been running a series of stories on the coal scam. Since Jindal is a big beneficiary, we have done quite a few stories on him. However, Jindal trying to hit our reporter is very unbecoming of a parliamentarian. All our reporter was doing was trying to get his side of the story."
The incident took place when a team of journalists from Zee News caught up with the owner of Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (JSPL) at a function in Le Meridien hotel. The channel claimed that its reporter sought clarifications from Jindal on the allegations levelled against his company in the coal block scam.
However, Jindal got upset at the questioning and first asked the reporter about his professional antecedents. When the reporter identified himself, the Congress MP first refused to talk to the channel, saying, "Zee News has been showing all rubbish on its channel."
On being told that some other channels had also taken up the issue, he lost his cool. The channel claimed an angry Jindal pushed the cameraperson and asked threateningly, "What is this, why are you coming to this programme... what are you doing?"
Jindal is facing heat after it came to light that JPL, a subsidiary of JSPL, was the first Indian power company to operate on a "merchant power" basis, which allowed it to sell electricity at a market rate that was higher than the rate at which power regulators fixed tariff for companies selling power to states through long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs).
Zee News editor Sudhir Chaudhary said, "We have been running a series of stories on the coal scam. Since Jindal is a big beneficiary, we have done quite a few stories on him. However, Jindal trying to hit our reporter is very unbecoming of a parliamentarian. All our reporter was doing was trying to get his side of the story."
=====================
CAG and SC’s deeper message
TNN | Sep 11, 2012
The CAG has made several caustic observations about government programmes, most specifically 2G and coal block allocations. Instead of rejecting them, the government should read CAG's reports more carefully. The BJP too should read them for what they are, and not politicize such an important issue.
Read more: Best way to avoid scams is to use one-step e-auctions india | CAG & SC's deeper message
Any auditor's report has observations on "efficiency" and on "loss". The estimates that have hogged political attention are those related to loss. But a careful reading of CAG's reports makes it clear that even its observations on loss are really observations on inefficiency in the government's allocation processes.
For example, CAG questions why it took over seven years to make auctions in coal possible. This is an efficiency observation that should make all parties ponder over our law-making inefficiencies. In 2G, the real question CAG raised was about the efficiency of a process called FCFS. The loss estimates are almost a side-show. In fact, even the CAG itself has said that the exact magnitude of the losses is not the point.
Similarly, the Supreme Court has canceled the 2G licenses largely because the process deployed to select winners was unfair and the government's discretionary powers were abused. While the SC ruled that auctions were a must for allocating national resources, it consciously abstained from stating that maximizing revenues should be the objective. In fact, the objective should be "consumer good" in the SC's words.
The real issue is not the loss to the exchequer. It is that the government should not have discretion in allotting natural resources to anybody. We need a consistent policy on the method of allotting resources based on the type of resource and the desired objective.
For example, school admissions, land, DDA flats, telecom, radio, mines etc are different in character and based on the desired objective we should choose a consistent method.
The revenue it fetches is least relevant. What is important is that resources are allocated fairly, transparently and without a hint of corruption, in the interest of the public and industry. Even a one-rupee price is not a problem as long it is fair. The price is only a factor of demand and supply. The lower the price and the revenue generated from allocation, the better it is for industry and the consumer.
The spirit of what both CAG and the SC are saying is that methods such as lotteries, FCFS and beauty parades should be abandoned in favour of transparent e-auctions: Auctions that put resources in the right hands so that products and services roll out efficiently. Auctions that focus on consumer good. Auctions that support India's push towards faster economic growth by creating a vibrant, profitable and sustainable industrial sector. And, very importantly, auctions that wipe out corruption.
Read more: Best way to avoid scams is to use one-step e-auctions india | CAG & SC's deeper message
Any auditor's report has observations on "efficiency" and on "loss". The estimates that have hogged political attention are those related to loss. But a careful reading of CAG's reports makes it clear that even its observations on loss are really observations on inefficiency in the government's allocation processes.
For example, CAG questions why it took over seven years to make auctions in coal possible. This is an efficiency observation that should make all parties ponder over our law-making inefficiencies. In 2G, the real question CAG raised was about the efficiency of a process called FCFS. The loss estimates are almost a side-show. In fact, even the CAG itself has said that the exact magnitude of the losses is not the point.
Similarly, the Supreme Court has canceled the 2G licenses largely because the process deployed to select winners was unfair and the government's discretionary powers were abused. While the SC ruled that auctions were a must for allocating national resources, it consciously abstained from stating that maximizing revenues should be the objective. In fact, the objective should be "consumer good" in the SC's words.
The real issue is not the loss to the exchequer. It is that the government should not have discretion in allotting natural resources to anybody. We need a consistent policy on the method of allotting resources based on the type of resource and the desired objective.
For example, school admissions, land, DDA flats, telecom, radio, mines etc are different in character and based on the desired objective we should choose a consistent method.
The revenue it fetches is least relevant. What is important is that resources are allocated fairly, transparently and without a hint of corruption, in the interest of the public and industry. Even a one-rupee price is not a problem as long it is fair. The price is only a factor of demand and supply. The lower the price and the revenue generated from allocation, the better it is for industry and the consumer.
The spirit of what both CAG and the SC are saying is that methods such as lotteries, FCFS and beauty parades should be abandoned in favour of transparent e-auctions: Auctions that put resources in the right hands so that products and services roll out efficiently. Auctions that focus on consumer good. Auctions that support India's push towards faster economic growth by creating a vibrant, profitable and sustainable industrial sector. And, very importantly, auctions that wipe out corruption.
कोणत्याही टिप्पण्या नाहीत:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा