The Hindu Business Line : `We do not want foreign funds to take us over'

THE Left parties have occupied centrestage during the past four months since the United Progressive Alliance Government came to power. Not a day passes by without the markets and (a few industrialists) trembling at one more pronouncement from "Left" leaders.

Mr Gurudas Dasgupta, prominent leader of the Communist Party of India (CPI) and General Secretary of the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC), minces no words. In a no-holds barred interview, Mr Dasgupta was at his combative best - but without raising his voice or losing his cool.

There is controversy about the inclusion of foreign experts in the Planning Commission for review. What is your objection to their presence?

The presence of foreign experts dilutes the commitment of the Planning Commission. These foreign experts have their own agenda. They look at the problem from their own angle. They have in mind, the question of economic reform than anything else. Indian experts will be guided by Indian realities. Therefore we are of the view that those who have a commitment to the Indian people should be given the job. They can advise - but why should they join the Planning Commission?

They are going to be there in a consultative capacity. They are not going to make policy...

For that you don't need to make them a Member of the Planning Commission. You can always seek a report from Asian Development Bank, or seek their suggestions. I don't think this (inviting foreign experts) was ever done in the past. Why should we make room for them? Do you find anywhere else in the world, foreigners being part of the Planning Commission? This is wrong. There is no dearth of expertise here. We don't need them. India is a great country capable of taking care of our own problems.

If you want me to be more precise, the foreign experts are keener to make the country a dumping ground for foreign goods. Do they want India to be strong or self-reliant economically? There is no political, economic or intellectual reason for their inclusion.

Can you stop the process of being interdependent?

It is not a question of being interdependent. It is a matter of surrendering a part of your sovereign rights to someone else. We do know that the world, country and society are interdependent.

You are also opposed to foreign direct investment (FDI) in telecom, insurance, aviation and banking. Don't we need money for such infrastructure?

We want foreign direct investment for greenfield projects for increasing production and for augmenting the creation of wealth. We do not want it for mercantile reason. They are all coming as short-term capital for making a quick buck and going away. They are coming to the stock market and the Government is more interested to bring them there to give the world a signal that we have enough foreign funds. We don't want foreign investment to come and take over our strategic sectors.

The Prime Minister has just invited foreign investment to the tune of $150 billion in infrastructure industries... .

Let it come. If they build the infrastructure, say a road, it is ok. . But they cant be the owners of the road. We want foreign money to assist us - not take us over. Let them build assets for us. But we can't guarantee a pre-determined rate of profit. They must face market exigencies.

Why would anyone want to put in money without being given ownership rights or the prospect of earning good profits?

Let them build factories and let them make reasonable profits. Let them submit to the rule of the country. Let them not believe they are superstars. If they think India is profitable, they will come. Where else (except in China) will you get such a huge market of 110 crore people? If we have the compulsion to get foreign funds, owners of such funds also have a compulsion to seek markets. It is the mutuality of needs that will be the driving point. We shouldn't beg for it.

Mr Chidambaram has been talking about the consolidation in the banking sector.

We are against it. Reforms should not lead to monopoly. We are against monopolies even if they are in the public sector.

But doesn't that contradict the philosophy that you espoused a couple of years ago, about the public sector occupying commanding heights of the economy?

The commanding heights should be occupied collectively by the public sector - not by being consolidated

But it is only by becoming consolidated; can they become strong, isn't it? Especially now, when they have to face competition from outside...

No. No. If they become consolidated they can ruin themselves by becoming reckless. Power can make them reckless. They can become despotic. Economic reform must lead to transparency and competition. Mr Chidambaram wants to dispense with competition. That is against the norm of viability. Consolidated strength can lead to disaster because power can go into their heads - they can rule. We don't want anyone to rule the financial markets.

It is strange that you are saying this - because this is the same charge against the Left parties - that power has gone into your heads, that you are a roadblock for everything.

Power has not gone into our heads. We are able to touch the fringe of power. Since you cannot rule the country without our support, we have a taste of it.

True. But it is like holding a shotgun to the Government or a kind of veto on whatever they do ...

Somebody is holding a cannon on us. What can the shotgun do? The monopoly power, the Congress Party, the World Bank are holding a mortar gun on us. It is not a question of who is having more gun power. It is the question of enjoying the support of the Left. If you want to enjoy it, you must give a price. And the price is to be conscientious on the basis of policies.

Aren't having 27 public sector banks a kind of fragmentation of capacity and therefore inefficient?

The history of nationalised banking has only shown that the number of banks don't stand in the way of individual progress and prosperity. We have 35-year long experience. India is not a United Kingdom or Sri Lanka. We have 110 crore people. We would like more banks to come up. 27 banks are not enough. They should go to rural areas and mop up social savings. The stronger you become, the more you are prone to aberration. It will be beyond control.

Are you saying banks should not grow beyond a particular point?

Banks should always grow, but through competition and transparency. Let us not think of monopoly of public sector. We are against political monopoly. We are against financial monopoly.

We notice that the Left does the opposite of what it says outside, in West Bengal. There, you are pro-reform, and pro-industry under Mr Buddhadev Bhattacharya?

That is a canard that we are doing the opposite in West Bengal. Everyone has to be pro-industry if we are to progress as a country. The point is - what is the way to grow industry. We believe in the co-existence of a multiplicity of forms. We believe in the public sector and the private sector. We believe in transnational corporations and in cooperatives. The multiplicity of forms and their coexistence is the basic pre-condition for the growth of the economy.

Let us not have illicit love for multinational companies. Let us not have hatred for the public sector. Both are bad. Don't have it. No country has grown by depending on foreign funds. They have only an auxiliary role.

All these things - Can't you do it in West Bengal?

They are doing it. We are suggesting it to them. But the UPA Government does not have the political commitment or courage. To meet the gap, they are going to other countries with a begging bowl. Dr Manmohan Singh should not beg.

Indian politicians lose sight of the mutuality of needs. They have taken foreign funds as a creed.