The PPP route to growth

That the Narendra Modi government ran into a wall of Opposition in Parliament in trying to push reform legislation in coal and insurance is unfortunate Even so, ordinances cannot institutionalise a new model of governance; at best, they may only signal to a restive industry that the Centre means business and buy some time to cobble up a consensus in Parliament. But even if such a consensus on amending laws on land acquisition, labour, mining and the financial sector takes time in coming, there are enough areas where supply side constraints can be eased without breaking into so much as a sweat. One of these is allowing for renegotiation in new PPP projects, if not in existing ones. The 3P India initiative, announced by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley in the Budget, marks a salutary attempt to address “weaknesses of the PPP framework, the rigidities in contractual arrangements, the need to develop more nuanced models of contracting, and speedy dispute redressal”. This process needs to be cranked up for the over 900 PPP infrastructure projects in the fray, involving a credit exposure of nearly ₹9 trillion.

In this context, the recent RBI circular extending the so-called 5:25 scheme to existing infrastructure projects is to be welcomed. These projects can now get finance over 25 years, with the banks being allowed to refinance or sell out their loans every five years. This is a way out of the stressed assets logjam that has frozen up both the supply and demand for credit. The growth of bank credit to infrastructure sectors fell from 45 per cent in 2011-12 to 18 per cent in 2013-14 and has been trending downward since. Banks cannot lend beyond a tenure of 10 to 12 years due to their asset profile, and this impacts both the viability of the loan and the costing/pricing of projects such as roads and metros, among others. The India Infrastructure Finance Company, set up in 2006 to overcome the asset-liability mismatch, does not seem to have made enough headway.

However, as the Finance Minister observed, finance is only one of the problems weighing down PPPs. Contracts need to be renegotiated when macroeconomic shocks overturn earlier assumptions. To ward off allegations of crony capitalism or litigation from bidders who lose out in the first stage, it is important to create a credible institutional mechanism. This is precisely what 3P India should set out to do, besides thinking up innovative financial instruments and concession agreements. It could ease up exit conditions, so that promoters can use the freed up capital for other projects. Pricing should combine public purpose considerations with those of risk and efficiency. Pushing big ticket reforms is no cakewalk in a raucous polity such as ours. Yet, a robust PPP framework can make a difference in cranking up investment and growth.

COMMENT NOW