Under fire from all sides, primarily over an alleged yen for freebies, and all set to float a party of his own, an unrepentant Minister for Communications, Ram Vilas Paswan, chooses to fight back in a conversation with BT's Suveen K. Sinha and Seetha. Excerpts:

Q. There are reports of your leaving the Janata Dal (United) and starting a new party. What is the reason for this move?

A. When a person is in a party, he wants it to progress. He wants the party to do some constructive work. Unfortunately, that wasn't happening. In three years, there was no meeting of the national executive; even nine months after the elections the party hadn't elected a parliamentary party leader.

Will you still remain a part of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA)?

Of course, I will. Whether I remain a part of the JD(U) or float my own party, I will always remain a part of the NDA. I am committed to strengthening it.

It has been nine months since you took over as Communications Minister. Looking back, what have you achieved and what unfinished tasks remain?

It is the government's policy to corporatise the department of telecom (dot) as early as possible. And we are committed to completing the process by October 1, 2000. As soon as I became a minister, the department was bifurcated into dot and the Department of Telecom Services (DTS). Six months have passed and there has been no progress towards corporatisation. So, we again took a decision to bifurcate the DTS-into DTS and the Department of Telecom Operations (DTO).

The government has also formed a group of ministers under my chairmanship, which will look into the pending issues relating to employees. The employees know DTS is to be corporatised. They are concerned about their future-their pay, pension benefits, etc. The government will sort things out.

Then there were the problems of the private operators. That has also been sorted out. We have constituted a new Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) providing absolute power on issues relating to tariff, and we have set-up an appellate tribunal. After this, there is no apprehension in the minds of the operators and foreign investors.

The third issue relates to the development of teledensity. Right now, teledensity is 0.6 per cent in the rural areas and 2.8 per cent in the urban areas. In contrast, the world average is 15 to 16 per cent. We want to increase teledensity to 7 per cent by 2005, and 15 per cent by 2010. For this we require $30 billion by 2005, and $78 billion by 2010. Therefore, we need the help of the private sector.

What about rural telephony?

We have also set a target of providing telephone facility in each village by 2002. And every panchayat will have a sanchar dhaba, or communication centre, where all facilities like Net access will be provided.

We want to provide world-class services in the urban areas. For that more and more competition is required. That's why a level-playing field has been provided for private operators so that there is no room for any complaints.

We want world class technology. There are villages that we cannot reach. For that we want new technology. Wireless In Local Loop (WILL) is one option. Earlier it was Multi-Access Rural Radio (MARR), but, unfortunately, in the contract there were no terms and conditions relating to maintenance.

Till now, a total of 3.75 lakh villages have telephone facilities available to them. Out of this, 2.11 lakh villages are covered by MARR. This year 1 lakh more villages will be given telephone facilities. The rest will be covered by 2002. We plan to do this in phases. By August 15, 2000, we want to cover all villages in five states-Tamil Nadu, Haryana, Punjab, Kerala, and Andaman and Nicobar Islands. We will cover all the southern states by 2001, and the remaining states by 2002.

It is a daunting task. How do you plan to do it?

We want to prepare our employees for this task, give them incentives. But, unfortunately, when the private sector provides working facilities to their employees, nobody thinks in terms of money. But if that facility, or even better facilities, is given to government employees, I don't know why the private sector gets so concerned about it.

Look at this controversy over free telephones to dot employees. In any case, it is not a minister's decision; it is a decision of the Telecom Commission. But I think it is justified. This facility should have been provided earlier. The private sector also provides such facilities. (Bharti Enterprises Chairman) Sunil Mittal spoke to me. He said: ''Sir, I don't know why there is this controversy in the press. We have provided free mobile phones to our staff!''

All the Class III and Class IV retired employees of dot are getting rent-free telephones. So are Class I and II retired employees. The Railways, the Airlines, the Delhi Vidyut Board-everyone gives free facilities.

We have provided 2.70 crore telephone connections to the country, and when we want to provide our employees with some facilities, there is an unnecessary hue and cry about it.

Maybe the controversy arose because of the cost involved.

When we give concessions to income tax payers, is that not a loss to the government? It is said that the bail-out package for private operators, when they shifted from licence fee to revenue sharing, caused a loss of Rs 20,000 crore (some people said Rs 30,000 crore). At that time, the press didn't scream. And how much money is the free phone facility going to involve? I can challenge you that it will not be more than Rs 66 crore a year.

But the figures being quoted are much higher-Rs 1,200 crore.

That is a wrong figure. One newspaper gives a wrong figure and others don't bother to check. Everyone goes by that wrong figure.

That figure was given by the finance ministry...

No. No. That was not given by the Finance Ministry. Even the Finance Minister did not know how that figure was arrived at.

But the Finance Minister was opposed to the free phones...

He did not oppose the move. The Finance Minister...he, he...It is...When something is written in the media, and then a clarification is given, no-one bothers to print that.

Where was this controversy when, two years back, retired employees were given this facility? Why did the employees ask for this facility? Because retired employees had been given this facility. When 80,000 retired employees are given these facilities, and serving employees are left out, it will create discontent.

Do you want me to work in an underhand manner? Ram Vilas Paswan always wants things transparent. In Railways, when I tried to make things transparent, there was a controversy.

You regularised 60,000 employees there....

Don't you want to be regularised? Why are you being hypocritical? Every journalist, politician, official is concerned about his future. Should labourers not be concerned about their future? And whom did I regularise? Those who had worked for more than 15 years.

Then there was this noise about Ram Vilas Paswan having given out railway passes. I gave passes to coolies. When a coolie gets on to the train, does anyone ask him for a ticket? I only gave them social respect. Go ask the masses about Ram Vilas Paswan.

Why are you being targeted?

I don't think I am being targeted. That day one (news)paper carried a front page item about Paswan having given free phones to mps. But that bill is being borne by the Parliamentary Affairs Ministry. Did anyone carry that clarification? Did anyone bother asking me for my version?

When I give benefits to casual labourers, the rich and influential may criticise me, but you should go see the standing I have among the casual labourers.

Why is the press hostile towards you?

It is a question of the management. The journalists and the management don't see eye to eye. People tell me they write something and something else gets printed.

See, when your wage board gives a recommendation, don't you agitate for its implementation? But when government employees benefit, everyone immediately cries about losses; that Paswan has caused a loss of Rs 6,000 crore to Railways?

Nobody will criticise you if you double the passenger fare. You will be hailed as reform-oriented. However, if the freight rate is increased by 2 per cent, you are condemned as the worst minister. What happened in Railways? I killed all the wagon and sleeper lobbies. I made the system transparent.

Look at rural telephony. Ours is a welfare state. If we make money in Delhi, we (the Government) put it in, say, Bihar. When everything goes into private hands, they will not want to venture into the rural areas. And, neither will the government department.

If the government's policy is to privatise, it is also to provide telephones in each village. The private sector gave telephones to all of 12 villages against their target of 55,000. The government provided telephones in 35,000 villages against the target of 45,000. When I took charge in October, 1999, only 3,000 villages had telephones.

How will you encourage the private sector to go into villages?

To be fair, the private sector has also faced problems because of licence fees. With revenue sharing, they will venture into villages. Whatever is the loss, it will be made up by the USO (Universal Service Obligation). We must have uniform development.

Will corporatisation really happen by October 1, 2000?

Certainly. What you can't do in three months, you can't do in three years. When I was in the Railways, I often said: ''Where there is a will, there is railway. Where there is no will, there is a survey.''

Once corporatisation happens, what will happen to DTO?

Both DTS and DTO will be corporatised.

Will they make one corporation or two?

One. DTS and DTO will be merged and converted into one corporation: Bharat Sanchar Nigam.

So much for corporatisation. What about privatisation of Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (VSNL) and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd (MTNL)?

It's up to the government. I have said that until this corporatisation happens, let's not discuss these issues. Let DTS be corporatised first.

Were MTNL and VSNL discussed at the recent disinvestment commission meeting?

No.

Are you, in principle, opposed to privatisation or in favour of it?

Privatisation is government policy. No single minister can oppose that.

What about the opening up of national long distance telephony to private parties?

We will do it soon. The recommendations of TRAI have been given.

But the new TRAI has recommended a limit of four operators in addition to the government. The old TRAI was opposed to any limit on the number of players as it would limit competition.

I have gone through that. See, the terms and conditions put by the old TRAI (a net worth of Rs 2,500 crore and Rs 500 crore in entry fees) also limited the number of players without putting it in words. But we will take a view on this. We want free competition. The high net worth and entry fee requirements are sufficient to limit the number of players. Once you have fixed the criteria, why limit the number of players as well? Why have both? We will look into this.

Issue Contents  Write to us   Subscriptions   Syndication 

INDIA TODAY |  INDIA TODAY PLUS | COMPUTERS TODAY
TEENS TODAY | NEWS TODAY | MUSIC TODAY | ART TODAY | CARE TODAY

© Living Media India Ltd