S Gurumurthy
Sonia Gandhi never opened her mouth on
the 2G scam when the 2G scam broke out in 2009; or, when the CBI raided the DoT
in October 2009; or, when the CAG report indicted the government in November
2010 for causing loss as between Rs
58,000cr and 1.76 lakh cr; or, when A Raja, the Telecom Minister resigned a
couple of days later; or, when the UPA Government’s one man inquiry by Justice
Shivraj Patil indicted him in January 2011;or, when Raja was raided by the CBI
in January/February 2011; or, when he was arrested in February 2011; or, when
the Supreme Court began chasing the government to act against the looters in 2G
scam; or, when the CBI said in its chargesheet in April 2011 that the loss was
Rs 31,000 crore; or, when the Supreme Court cancelled the 2G licenses in
February 2012; or, when the former Cabinet Secretary K M Chandrasekhar told the
JPC in October 2012 that he had recommended to the PM to charge Rs 35,000cr
instead of Rs 1,658cr charged.
She has opened her mouth only now when
R P Singh, former Director General of Audit [CAG], obviously lied to the nation
that he was made to sign the CAG report. R P Singh is now Sonia’s new Gospel.
R P Singh, who had signed the CAG
report on 2G scam on 8.11.2011, began prevaricating that he did not want the
loss figures included in the report.
He shamelessly says that he was made
to sign the report. Most media reports have ripped apart his lies. He has not
only signed the audit report, he had also sent a forwarding letter to the
report saying “If 2G rates are to be pegged to the rates discovered through
auction for 3G spectrum, the impact
would be Rs 1.02 lakh crore. “ Does it not mean that he fixes the loss
as Rs 1.02 lakh cr. The difference between the high-end figure of Rs 1.76 lakh cr and Rs 1.02 lakh cr is
because he did not account for dual technology and extra spectrum that was
included in the total loss of Rs 1.76 lakh cr. Now, the man says that the loss
is only Rs 2,645 cr. Why did he not mention it in the covering letter in 2011?
The man is lying is self-evident. The proof will come when he gets the reward
for his lie. R P Singh’s success is in making Sonia talk on 2G.
Sonia Gandhi had long back declared
zero tolerance to corruption.Obviously she does not seem to tolerate the zeros
in the figure of 1,76,000 and would like
them knocked out. She hints at the zeroes being added by the CAG at the
instance of Public Accounts Committee headed by
M M Joshi.
Kapil Sibal claimed once that there
was zero loss in 2G licences. But,he did
not dare repeat it a second time. Even P Chidambaram, who almost did a Sibal on
Coalgate, didn’t support Sibal in 2G. No one questions the fact of the loss,
even though the extent of loss is debatable. Even the CAG report, bearing R P
Singh’s signature says: “The fact that there has been loss to the national
exchequer in the allocation of 2G spectrum cannot be denied. However, the
amount of loss could be debated.” On the extent of the loss arising by selling
the spectrum at 2001 rates, the CAG report had put the loss at between a low
of Rs 57,566cr and a high of Rs
1,76,645cr.
The CAG’s range consists of the
following four indicators: One, Rs 57,566cr on the basis of the offer made by S
Tel for open bid for the spectrum; two, Rs 1,76,645cr on the basis of open bids
for 3G licenses; three, on the basis of the sale of shares by two of the
licensees, Unitech [Rs 69,626cr] and
Swan [Rs 57,566cr]. The Swan-sale based loss figure is the lowest and
the 3G auction based figure is the highest. Even Sonia’s fans cannot argue that
the loss to government could be less than the profit accrued to Swan and
Unitech which just resold the 2G licenses allotted by the UPA Government. The
media and the Opposition picked up and highlighted the upper end of Rs
1.76 lakh cr. If the yardstick of former
Cabinet Secretary K M Chandrasekhar is accepted, the loss figure would be as
high as Rs 4lakh crore, as the draft report of CAG had mentioned. So even the
original figure of CAG in the draft report was not without basis. It was
founded on the Cabinet Secretary’s view.
The debate on the amount of loss has
restarted because, in the auction of 2G spectrum in November 2012, most telecom
companies which bought spectrum at throw away prices in 2008 refrained from
bidding. There was virtual stampede for spectrum with 575 applicants for 122
licenses in 2008. But only five players have bid in 2012. Reason? Against the
throw away price of `1,658cr charged for 22 circles in 2008, the government
demanded a high minimum base price of
`14,000. The telcos could have paid this price in 2008 but not in 2012. Because
the market conditions have changed. See what a global telecom player says on
why there is not so much demand for spectrum now as compared to 2008. Marten
Pieters, Managing Director and CEO, Vodafone, who has welcomed and participated
in the auction of 2G spectrum now, says,
“The value of spectrum depends on a lot of factors. Three years ago, when 3G
spectrum was auctioned, the Indian economy was booming. But now the economy is
not performing so well. And in the last few months, the number of our customers
has reduced to just over 900 million from around 930 million.” This answers
those who question the CAG’s numbers.
Spectrum commanded much higher value
in 2008 than now. So what the government should have done in 2008, namely fix a
high minimum price, it has done now. The debate is about what was the spectrum
value then, not what is its value today. That the value of spectrum then and
now, is manifest in the share prices of telecom companies. Bharti Airtel share
price in January 2008 was Rs 482. Before the 2G bid now, it was Rs 264, at
almost half.
Take a comparison. If the land prices
were low in 2001 and high in 2008, could the government have sold land in 2008
at 2001 rates to the first applicants without bid? Obviously not.
Assume the CBI had prosecuted those
who undersold the land in 2008 and the land prices fall in 2012. Can they turn
around and say that the land prices in 2012 should be substituted for its 2008
prices and they should be acquitted? What applies to land applies to spectrum
as well. The loss to the government on sale of spectrum has to be computed
under the market conditions that obtained in 2008 when the telecom industry was booming, not under the
current market conditions when the telecom industry is doing only half as well
as in 2008, though still several times
better than in 2001.
Even now, Vodafone has bid for 14 out of the 22 circles; and
Telenor for 5 circles at base prices. The bid amount of Vodafone is not known.
But the Telenor bid [for 5 circles] is Rs 4,048, while, in 2008, pan-India
spectrum [22 circles] was sold to Telenor for Rs 1,658 cr. For these five
circles alone, the government had lost Rs 2,598cr in 2008. The number of circles
in issue is 122. This is not to say that the loss would be proportionately
high. But that it would be a staggering sum, not Rs 2,645cr as R P Singh
falsely says, is established by bids for spectrum now.
QED: Zero tolerance to corruption does
not mean knocking out the zeros in the amount of loss--or what it yields
namely, BRIBE.
No comments:
Post a Comment