This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
PARLIAMENTARY REPORT


INDIA


PRIME MINISTER DEFENDS GOVERNMENT’S DECISION


The Monsoon Session of Lok Sabha continued from 8 August to 7 September 2012, with a total of 19 sittings. Following the tabling of the Performance Audit Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India on “allocation of coal blocks and augmentation of coal production” on 17 August Parliament proceedings were disrupted for a few days. In its report, the CAG, the official auditor of the government, was critical of the allocation of coal blocks by the government on several counts. The CAG had stated that the inter- Ministerial Screening Committee did not follow a transparent and objective method while making recommendations for the allocation of coal blocks. The competitive bidding could have been introduced in 2006 by amending the administrative instructions in vogue instead of going through a prolonged legal examination of the issue which delayed the decision making process. The report also mentioned that the delay in introduction of competitive bidding rendered the existing process beneficial to a large number of private companies. The Auditor also estimated financial gains of 1.86 lakh crore rupees ($34 billion) likely to accrue to private coal block allots. A part of this financial gain could have accrued to the national exchequer by operationalizing the decisions taken years earlier to introduce competitive bidding for allocation of coal blocks.


328 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Four


The audit believed there was a need for strict regulatory and monitoring mechanism to ensure that benefit of cheaper coal was passed on to consumers. The opposition members were up in arms against the government, demanding the resignation of the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, MP, who was in charge of the Coal Ministry for many years. On 27 August, the Prime


Minister made a statement in the Lok Sabha on issues raised by the CAG. Due to continuous interruptions, he could not complete his statement and laid a copy on the Table of the House. In his statement, the Prime Minister said the Ministry concerned would respond to the issues


without basis and unsupported by facts. The Prime Minister said


since 1993 captive coal blocks were allocated on the basis of recommendations made by an inter-Ministerial Screening Committee which also had representatives of state governments. Taking into account the increasing number of applicants for coal block allocation, the government in 2003, evolved a consolidated set of guidelines to ensure transparency and consistency in allocation. It was the UPA-I government which, for the first time, conceived the idea of making allocations through the competitive bidding route in June 2004. The Prime Minister stated that


Dr Manmohan Singh, MP


raised in the report of the CAG once it was tabled in Parliament. The PAC would then submit its report to the Speaker and that Report would be then discussed in Parliament. Taking full responsibility for the decisions of the Ministry, he asserted that any allegations of impropriety were


the policy of allocation of coal blocks to private parties, which the CAG had criticized, was not a new policy introduced by the UPA. The policy had existed since 1993 and previous governments also allocated coal blocks in precisely the same manner. The UPA made improvements in the procedure in 2005 by inviting applications through open advertisements after providing details of the coal blocks on offer along with the guidelines and the conditions of allotment. The applications were examined and evaluated by a broad-based Steering Committee with representatives from state governments, related Ministries of the central government and the coal companies. Any administrative allocation


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112