Yuku free message boards

Parag, you've hit the nail bang on its head. Where did the Finance Code come in picture here? I sometimes wonder why do we create PSUs in the first place. I see a lack of understanding at a very fundamental level. If IR has 30,000 crores of its own - and as far as I'm concerned nothing is IR's own, all is government money not unless IR itself is an autonomous entity beyond the government - it should go ahead and merrily lay hazaar freight corridors. Strictly abiding by its Codes and Manuals. Unfortunately the IR,which is the government, does not have that kind of money. There is a need for such corridors. If the government does not have money, it allows others to lay such infrastructure. The government, which in this case is the IR, does not want others for a plethora of reasons to get into this segment. The government (read IR) feels that it can spare 6,000-7,000 crores. Rest of the money should come either as debt or equity. Now the government (read Ministry of Finance) also feels that the government (read IR) should not indulge in raising debt or equity from the market. So with 7,000 crores the government (read IR) cannot lay such corridors. End of story and the government (read IR) should gracefully allow any Tom, Dick and Harry who thinks he has the money to do the job. But the government (read IR) still believes that it must remain in this segment. So someone thinks hard and creates a PSU - call it a SPV or whatever. The moment it is done, the government (read IR) is not any longer the only stake holder. There would be lenders or equity holders and both. They would not want any Johny from the government to come and run the show the way it has been run over the years (such a desire may not be entirely express, but ask any one who has tried to tie up a loan on behalf of a PSU). They expressly do not want a huge overhead. In other words, they simply do not want the organizational structure we have created in our project organizations with the same paraphrenalia as in the government. That leads to a situation that Parag has already talked about. The PSU now has two choices: (1) it hires people from the market to run the show, (2) it takes employees on deputation from the government. The PSU realizes while trying to exercise the first option that the cost of hired personnel who are as competent as some of the government employees it wishes to take on deputation - if not more - is at least five times more. It is still a public organization. So it abides by the Canons of Financial Propriety and decides to take government employees on deputation. A deputation is always a voluntary choice on part of the government employee. Most often than not individuals who display a remarkable flair for common prudence and diligently abide by the Canons of Financial Propriety in all spheres of life volunteer only when they feel that they are getting compensated in some form what they are losing. I certainly do not know about individuals who have joined the government or are still in the government under the illusion that they are not professionals and that they are social workers.

subhashish.

NB:
(1) The much vilified perk is not for household items which could also be one's child's diapers or the crockery that one uses to eat. I have not seen the employee manuals of these organizations. But I am sure it must be items that one uses to run an office from home. I might have spent 6 years or 35 years in the government. I might have generated enough savings to buy those items for my own use. But left to myself, I would simply refuse to use those items for any official purpose. I refuse to be under the illusion that I am doing social service by using my own belongings for official purpose.

(2) The perks to my mind are available for General Managers and above (not JAG/SG), which I believe is a standard industry norm.

(3) To put things under perspective, an organization of 1000 employees, who would be responsible for implementing a 30,000 crore project in a span of 4-5 years, would require a minimum of 40,000 SFT of hired office space (that's 40 SFT per head including utility areas - compare that with your 'government chamber.'). That tantamounts to a rental of a minimum of Rs 1.2 crore a month by the most conservative estimate. There would be a maximum of 50 officers who would be General Manager or above in an organization of 1000 employees. That would mean a one time expenditure of not more than Rs 40 lacs by the most liberal estimate. So much for the vilified wastage of public money.

(4)Regarding non-availability of a revenue model for DFC, someone in the government, I am sure, must have seen a significant revenue potential in the project. Else no person of common prudence conceives of a 30,000 crore project with 7,000 crore in the pocket. When someone else puts in the balance 23,000 crore either through debt or equity, at that very point of time the notion that all traffic running on this line is mine and hence I will pocket all the revenue ceases to exist. So revenue model or no revenue model, at the end of the day, when traffic starts moving on the line, a lion's share of the revenue shall be DFC's.

(5) Regarding IRCTC lapping up anything and everything that is a result of increase in cost for IR's passengers, it's sheer nonsense. The government (IR) thought either they cannot or they should not do what IRCTC is mandated to do. The reasons could be many. Either the government did not have the expertise. Or it would have cost the government much more within the existing set up. Or the organizational structure did not provide much manouvering space to achieve the end result. Once IRCTC is created and mandated to do what it is doing, it would continue to stake a claim on the cost incurred from the Passenger revenues. The notion that Passenger revenue is IR's money and IRCTC should provide the service from its own means ceases to exist.