Recently we were with some friends and their two sons who are in their mid-twenties. As always the conversation drifted to India and to the moral decay. This is similar to the conversation we have when our two children come home for holidays as well. It is difficult not to talk about corruption in India when it hits you in your face every day, when you open the news paper, when you switch on the television set, when you drive your car and the policeman pulls you to the side for a make believe traffic violation. It is difficult to have hope when you see daily the politicians and bureaucrats get away with ripping off the country with the equivalent of million of dollars through Common Wealth Games scam, telecom scam, coal auction scam, defense contracts scams and so on. The media highlights these for a period but ultimately they get brushed under the carpet. After all how “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” ?How many scams and scandals can you fit on a page or a television screen every night ?
From the young people's perspective who want things to change, it is hard to convince them that things will get better and the fact that these are even being talked about is a good sign. It is difficult to explain to them that all countries go through this phase during economic development. The United Kingdom went through this. You have to read Charles Dickens to get an appreciation of the rampant state of corruption including the judiciary. It was similar in the United States in Chicago, New York and other American cities in the early nineteen hundreds and into the thirties and the forties. It was not all Brideshead Revisited or The Great Gatsby.
However that was then. It is hard for them to understand that even with modern technologies why is it so difficult to clean up the system. However with a population of one point two billion people and still growing, it is going to be a while for the society to cleanse itself.
In fairness, the government's intention has been well meaning and the funds allocated to meet the basic requirements has been increasing substantially . However there is a vast difference between what gets allocated and what is actually spent. The development economists euphemistically refer to this as “leakages ". This is a polite way of saying that the money is being siphoned off to the pockets of politicians, bureaucrats and others who are involved in the implementation of these programmes. It is difficult to quote any precise figures but based on anecdotal evidence, the actual number which is actually spent cannot be more twenty five percent , probably less. It varies from state to state .Some states do a much better job than the others. Even with that I am not sure there is any state which comes anywhere to achieving over seventy five percent implementation.
The question then arises as to what and how is to be done?
First and foremost accept that the fact that you will never bee able to eliminate corruption totally. No country has and no country will be able to regardless of what the government says. Let me give you a few examples of countries which are often quoted and who hold themselves to have high standards of governance.
The United States
The Economist March 15th,2012
"Rod Blagojevich, a former governor of Illinois….. was convicted last year of bribery, wire fraud and trying to sell a Senate seat. He is the fourth governor of Illinois out of the last seven to be convicted, and adds to the 1,828 public corruption convictions the state saw between 1976 and 2010. A report by the University of Illinois at Chicago estimates that corruption costs the state more than $500m ( small change by Indian standards ) a year. Two states had even higher numbers of appointees, government employees (and a few private individuals) convicted of public corruption: New York, with 2,522 convictions and California with 2,345 convictions. Of the largest states though, Illinois had the highest per person conviction rate, at 1.4 per 10,000 population. With little over 600,000 residents, the District of Columbia had a rate of nearly 17."
The United Kingdom
The Mirror News April 2nd 2012
“Access on a plate: PM's secret lavish dinners with party donors
DAVID Cameron had a string of secret lavish dinners with party donors in the mansions of rich backers, it was revealed yesterday.The PM was under mounting pressure last night to come clean about ALL his private meetings with donors following fresh sleaze allegations.Labour said he had "incredibly serious" questions to answer after he was accused of covering up a series of meetings with disgraced former party treasurer Peter Cruddas and donors - including an event at the PM's country retreat, Chequers.
Former standards commissioner Sir Alistair Graham said Mr Cameron was "in danger of falling into the sleaze category" by not being straight about his links to big money donors”
Ever so often you have news items about British Parliamentarians raising questions in Parliament if you paid them a few hundred pounds. About Parliamentarians and government officials fudging expense accounts. Even the extend royal family has been dragged into scandals about money for access.Of late you had the Parliamentary committee investigating the close ties between the senior executives of News Corp and the Police.
France
In France allegations have been made against the former IMF chief and who had been considered a potential candidate for Presidential elections for being involved with a prostitution racket.
Hong Kong
Closer to home ( at least for me, since I spent a greater part of my life there) in Hong Kong, the former Chief Executive Donald Tsang was accused of having accepted favors from business tycoons. Also the Independent Commission Against Corruption has initiated investigations against the former Chief Secretary ( effectively the number two after the Chief Executive ) and two of richest real estate tycoons in the world - the Kwok brothers. As an aside when I first reached Hong Kong the clean up process had just started by the then Governor Murray Maclehose, so I am disappointed to see that the clock is being reversed.
China
In China, I think I can sum it up by quoting a line from a book review in the Financial Times by Chris Patten, the last British Governor of Hong Kong " the remark of the old Maoist, Deng Liqun in the 1990s that if the party bosses did not eradicate graft, they would lose the support of the people; but if they did, they would lose party members." Sounds familiar does it not ? The present leadership is still struggling with it as was evident with the fall from grace of Bo Xilai a princeling in Chongqing.
I could go on and on, but it is obvious that corruption prevails in every single country. However it is not as invasive as it is in India. How do we resolve this and how do we minimize it ?
While some amount of corruption is explainable (not condoned) as money needed to fight elections, lets legalize it as the United States has done, including using the Public Action Committee which is nothing more than a vehicle used to target a component without the candidate actually spending money.
In India, the reason given to justify corruption among the bureaucrats is that their salaries are low, which is not true , either in absolute terms or the equivalent on a "cost to company" basis. Pay them the equivalent of the private sector , as they do in Singapore and let them find their own accommodation, pay for their own health care, pay for their own clubs, their own transportation and so on.. Let them commute for hours as the private sector does, but pay them cash up front. If they then don't perform or are caught red-handed, nail them to the wall.
The issue here is not that the laws do not exist. The issue here is that of implementation . Ever so often the stars align, as they are presently and you have a Chief Justice, a Comptroller And Auditor General Of India, and The Election Commissioner , supported by their peers who take it upon themselves to do the job of the government. Also you have an increasing number of individuals who file Public Interest Litigation cases to highlight scandal after scandal.What is needed is to increase the number of courts and also track the performance of the judiciary at the lower courts. Also have a time bound schedule for all cases.
It is difficult to expect the political parties to take the lead ,because almost every single party is tainted. If the young princelings are serious about making a difference they should set an example and bar any one with a criminal case pending against them from being given a legislative assembly or parliament ticket or making him or her a minister at the state or central level.
None of the above ideas are new and I am sure that there are a lot more out of the box ideas as to how corruption can be minimized. As Gurcharan Das said in one of his presentations, you will see major changes start to happen when the middle class reaches approximately fifty percent. In my opinion it will take a couple more decades where corruption will decrease and will reduce the impact on a day to day basis. Lets look forward to that day. I am not sure it will happen during my life, but I am confident that it will in my children's life time.
From the young people's perspective who want things to change, it is hard to convince them that things will get better and the fact that these are even being talked about is a good sign. It is difficult to explain to them that all countries go through this phase during economic development. The United Kingdom went through this. You have to read Charles Dickens to get an appreciation of the rampant state of corruption including the judiciary. It was similar in the United States in Chicago, New York and other American cities in the early nineteen hundreds and into the thirties and the forties. It was not all Brideshead Revisited or The Great Gatsby.
However that was then. It is hard for them to understand that even with modern technologies why is it so difficult to clean up the system. However with a population of one point two billion people and still growing, it is going to be a while for the society to cleanse itself.
In fairness, the government's intention has been well meaning and the funds allocated to meet the basic requirements has been increasing substantially . However there is a vast difference between what gets allocated and what is actually spent. The development economists euphemistically refer to this as “leakages ". This is a polite way of saying that the money is being siphoned off to the pockets of politicians, bureaucrats and others who are involved in the implementation of these programmes. It is difficult to quote any precise figures but based on anecdotal evidence, the actual number which is actually spent cannot be more twenty five percent , probably less. It varies from state to state .Some states do a much better job than the others. Even with that I am not sure there is any state which comes anywhere to achieving over seventy five percent implementation.
The question then arises as to what and how is to be done?
First and foremost accept that the fact that you will never bee able to eliminate corruption totally. No country has and no country will be able to regardless of what the government says. Let me give you a few examples of countries which are often quoted and who hold themselves to have high standards of governance.
The United States
The Economist March 15th,2012
"Rod Blagojevich, a former governor of Illinois….. was convicted last year of bribery, wire fraud and trying to sell a Senate seat. He is the fourth governor of Illinois out of the last seven to be convicted, and adds to the 1,828 public corruption convictions the state saw between 1976 and 2010. A report by the University of Illinois at Chicago estimates that corruption costs the state more than $500m ( small change by Indian standards ) a year. Two states had even higher numbers of appointees, government employees (and a few private individuals) convicted of public corruption: New York, with 2,522 convictions and California with 2,345 convictions. Of the largest states though, Illinois had the highest per person conviction rate, at 1.4 per 10,000 population. With little over 600,000 residents, the District of Columbia had a rate of nearly 17."
The United Kingdom
The Mirror News April 2nd 2012
“Access on a plate: PM's secret lavish dinners with party donors
DAVID Cameron had a string of secret lavish dinners with party donors in the mansions of rich backers, it was revealed yesterday.The PM was under mounting pressure last night to come clean about ALL his private meetings with donors following fresh sleaze allegations.Labour said he had "incredibly serious" questions to answer after he was accused of covering up a series of meetings with disgraced former party treasurer Peter Cruddas and donors - including an event at the PM's country retreat, Chequers.
Former standards commissioner Sir Alistair Graham said Mr Cameron was "in danger of falling into the sleaze category" by not being straight about his links to big money donors”
Ever so often you have news items about British Parliamentarians raising questions in Parliament if you paid them a few hundred pounds. About Parliamentarians and government officials fudging expense accounts. Even the extend royal family has been dragged into scandals about money for access.Of late you had the Parliamentary committee investigating the close ties between the senior executives of News Corp and the Police.
France
In France allegations have been made against the former IMF chief and who had been considered a potential candidate for Presidential elections for being involved with a prostitution racket.
Hong Kong
Closer to home ( at least for me, since I spent a greater part of my life there) in Hong Kong, the former Chief Executive Donald Tsang was accused of having accepted favors from business tycoons. Also the Independent Commission Against Corruption has initiated investigations against the former Chief Secretary ( effectively the number two after the Chief Executive ) and two of richest real estate tycoons in the world - the Kwok brothers. As an aside when I first reached Hong Kong the clean up process had just started by the then Governor Murray Maclehose, so I am disappointed to see that the clock is being reversed.
China
In China, I think I can sum it up by quoting a line from a book review in the Financial Times by Chris Patten, the last British Governor of Hong Kong " the remark of the old Maoist, Deng Liqun in the 1990s that if the party bosses did not eradicate graft, they would lose the support of the people; but if they did, they would lose party members." Sounds familiar does it not ? The present leadership is still struggling with it as was evident with the fall from grace of Bo Xilai a princeling in Chongqing.
I could go on and on, but it is obvious that corruption prevails in every single country. However it is not as invasive as it is in India. How do we resolve this and how do we minimize it ?
While some amount of corruption is explainable (not condoned) as money needed to fight elections, lets legalize it as the United States has done, including using the Public Action Committee which is nothing more than a vehicle used to target a component without the candidate actually spending money.
In India, the reason given to justify corruption among the bureaucrats is that their salaries are low, which is not true , either in absolute terms or the equivalent on a "cost to company" basis. Pay them the equivalent of the private sector , as they do in Singapore and let them find their own accommodation, pay for their own health care, pay for their own clubs, their own transportation and so on.. Let them commute for hours as the private sector does, but pay them cash up front. If they then don't perform or are caught red-handed, nail them to the wall.
The issue here is not that the laws do not exist. The issue here is that of implementation . Ever so often the stars align, as they are presently and you have a Chief Justice, a Comptroller And Auditor General Of India, and The Election Commissioner , supported by their peers who take it upon themselves to do the job of the government. Also you have an increasing number of individuals who file Public Interest Litigation cases to highlight scandal after scandal.What is needed is to increase the number of courts and also track the performance of the judiciary at the lower courts. Also have a time bound schedule for all cases.
It is difficult to expect the political parties to take the lead ,because almost every single party is tainted. If the young princelings are serious about making a difference they should set an example and bar any one with a criminal case pending against them from being given a legislative assembly or parliament ticket or making him or her a minister at the state or central level.
None of the above ideas are new and I am sure that there are a lot more out of the box ideas as to how corruption can be minimized. As Gurcharan Das said in one of his presentations, you will see major changes start to happen when the middle class reaches approximately fifty percent. In my opinion it will take a couple more decades where corruption will decrease and will reduce the impact on a day to day basis. Lets look forward to that day. I am not sure it will happen during my life, but I am confident that it will in my children's life time.
No comments:
Post a Comment