The latest act of the UPA-2 govt, which might have potentially far reaching consequences is allowing the FDI in multi brand retail. I have been hearing the argument that almost is "More FDI means reforming the economy for good". One can not say FDI is always good or always bad. It is not a white or black question. Whether it benefits the nation or not depends on the context. Sadly the kind or discourse set in this nation is that people who are for FDI are progressive and those against it are regressive.
FDI when introduced in multi brand retail can have far reaching consequences. Such a move requires threadbare discussion and debate, which unfortunately is missing. UPA-2 govt, had repeatedly said that an important institution of the parliament can not be bypassed or forced into making an important legislation like Lokpal without proper discussion and debate. The same Govt when it comes to FDI in retail, thinks otherwise.
I somehow see a similar pattern between the nuclear deal in 2008 to the current situation. Back then, anyone who opposed the nuclear deal was portrayed as a person who is unpatriotic, regressive etc. The media played a big role in shooting down the dissent and differing view point. I doubt if the media would be any different this time around.
A couple of articles in the foreign media appear criticizing the prime minister about the tragic state of affairs and surprisingly it spurns the PM and the Govt into action(which hardly cared about the resentment in this nation). Is there more arm twisting behind the scene than what is visible?
The message going out from this GOVT is "We value and remember democratic values and institutions ONLY when it will help our political objectives"
Well said. But sometimes, other parties won't support progressive measures to be taken (like what happened in signing nuclear deal). That's why debate and discussion won't help. But in case of FDI, yes, I agree that thorough discussion is required.
ReplyDeleteIn case of nuclear deal what is that which was promised...what did it turn out? What did US promise in terms of nuclear enrichment and reprocessing and what did it do later after signing the agreement? Today USA wants nuclear safety liability clause to be a weak damp squib so that they can do business easily which India govt is not able to push through in parliament. Constructive criticism is useful. Yes, i agree that people do criticism for personal and political gains. Let the discussion be out in open and people will judge who is on flimsy grounds. But what is being done now is altogether hijack the discussion and debate process.
ReplyDeletelots of people are for nuclear deal but several people from scientists...etc opposed the form. The deal should not be a hindrance rather it should be a useful proposition is what they felt
Delete