Skip to main content

US thintank: Modi succeeded in just 6 of 30 big reforms in two years; 11 "failures" include one-stop clearance

By Our Representative
Releasing a list of 30 “big reforms” that the Modi government was supposed to undertake when it took office in May 2014, in a status report card, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a bipartisan, nonprofit thinktank headquartered in Washington, D.C., has found that in just six of them it has succeeded in moving forward, while in 11 there has not been any progress, and in 13 there has been only a partial movement.
The six main Modi’s “successes”, the thinktank notes, three are relate to attracting foreign direct investment (FDI).
These include included relaxing rules for allowing foreign investment in construction projects; allowing more than 50 per cent foreign investment in Indian railways; and fully opening the coal mining sector to private/foreign investment.
The other “successes” the thinktank notes are conducting “transparent auctions” of telecom spectrum; deregulating diesel pricing to “lower government subsidies” and “encourage” expansion of private hydrocarbon production; and extending the expiration date of industrial licenses from two to seven years.
Among Modi’s failure, says the thinktank report card, the Modi government has failed to make it easier to start a business by offering one-stop shopping for clearances. It underlines, “The World Bank’s “Doing Business” report notes that India requires 12.9 procedures to start a business—well above the South Asian average (7.9 procedures).”
Then there was the failure to “raise” the ceiling on foreign institutional investment in Indian companies from 10 per cent limit, hindering “investment in high-growth Indian companies”. The thinktank comments, “In his February 29 Budget Speech Finance Minister Jaitley raised the investment limit for foreign portfolio investors in public sector enterprises from 49 per cent from 24 per cent”, but even this change has not “been notified by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).”
Also, says the thinktank, there was the failure to “relax government controls” over corporate downsizing India’s Industrial Disputes Act’s minimum 100 employees, “after which government permission is required to lay off workers”, adding, “Some firms choose to remain below this level, giving up growth opportunities, in order to retain flexibility.”
Then the government failed to “remove government-mandated minimum prices for agricultural goods”; to allow cities to issue municipal bonds to raise funds; to allow foreign lawyers to practice in India; creating a unified national tax on goods and services tax (GST); and make it quicker and easier for companies to go through bankruptcy.
Coming to partial successes, the thinktank notes, this could be seen in allowing more than 50 per cent foreign investment in defense; there is automatic approval of “FDI up to 49% automatic”, but beyond that there are certain conditions, like providing “access to state of the art technology.”
Similarly, there was partial success in allowing “more than 50% foreign investment in direct retail ecommerce”, as the “sector is still closed to FDI when companies sell directly to consumers”; in allowing insurance; deregulating natural gas pricing; ending retrospective taxation of crossborder investments; making it easier for states to use eminent domain to purchase land; reduce restrictions on foreign investment in multi-brand retail FDI; stop forcing banks to lend to “priority sectors”; and transfer to deliver cash subsidies through direct cash payments of subsidies.
---
Download scorecard HERE

Comments

Anonymous said…
Comment by User ribiy on Reddit -

The linked document, provides a different perspective than the headline.

Foremost, looks like the Think Tank has decided the parameters against which to measure the government. For example one of the parameter is 'Reduce restrictions on foreign investment in multi-brand retail'. Now BJP has clearly stated they won't to do this, so not sure if this should be a parameter. Another one is removal of 'minimum support price' for agri goods. That's also not going to happen.

But be that as it may. They must have their own methodologies to measure.

Now out of 30 reforms, they have succeed on 6.

On 13 others, the have made 'partial progress', which to me looks great and 'can' be added to the success list. For example in defense and insurance they have increased the FDI limit to 49%, but the think tank expects 50%+. The other partial one is natural gas pricing, where the think tank seems to be pretty happy with the progress. The progress is also being made on financial regulation, DBT, retrospective taxation, priority sector lending (listed as partial where they acknowledge good progress).

So that's 19 out of 30, where they have carried out reforms or it's work-in-progress.

That leaves 11. Out of which some are suspect cases like allowing foreign lawyers to work in India.

The other one is GST, which will happen sooner or later.

From what's left, where they say the progress isn't there is ease of doing business (that's like 4-5 parameters of 11 where the govt has failed).

In total, they actually rate the government better than even the most BJP supporters would do.

TRENDING

US govt funding 'dubious PR firm' to discredit anti-GM, anti-pesticide activists

By Our Representative  The Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA) has vocally condemned the financial support provided by the US Government to questionable public relations firms aimed at undermining the efforts of activists opposed to pesticides and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in India. 

Modi govt distancing from Adanis? MoEFCC 'defers' 1500 MW project in Western Ghats

By Rajiv Shah  Is the Narendra Modi government, in its third but  what would appear to be a weaker avatar, seeking to show that it would keep a distance, albeit temporarily, from its most favorite business house, the Adanis? It would seem so if the latest move of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) latest to "defer" the Adani Energy’s application for 1500 MW Warasgaon-Warangi Pump Storage Project is any indication.

Bayer's business model: 'Monopoly control over chemicals, seeds'

By Bharat Dogra*  The Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) has rendered a great public service by very recently publishing a report titled ‘Bayer’s Toxic Trails’ which reveals how the German agrochemical giant Bayer has been lobbying hard to promote glyphosate and GMOs, or trying to “capture public policy to pursue its private interests.” This report, written by Joao Camargo and Hans Van Scharen, follows Bayer’s toxic trail as “it maintains monopolistic control of the seed and pesticides markets, fights off regulatory challenges to its toxic products, tries to limit legal liability, and exercises political influence.” 

Militants, with ten times number of arms compared to those in J&K, 'roaming freely' in Manipur

By Sandeep Pandey*  The violence which shows no sign of abating in the ongoing Meitei-Kuki conflict in Manipur is a matter of concern. The alienation of the two communities and hatred generated for each other is unprecedented. The Meiteis cannot leave Manipur by road because the next district North on the way to Kohima in Nagaland is Kangpokpi, a Kuki dominated area where the young Kuki men and women are guarding the district borders and would not let any Meitei pass through the national highway. 

105,000 sign protest petition, allege Nestlé’s 'double standard' over added sugar in baby food

By Kritischer Konsum*    105,000 people have signed a petition calling on Nestlé to stop adding sugar to its baby food products marketed in lower-income countries. It was handed over today at the multinational’s headquarters in Vevey, where the NGOs Public Eye, IBFAN and EKO dumped the symbolic equivalent of 10 million sugar cubes, representing the added sugar consumed each day by babies fed with Cerelac cereals. In Switzerland, such products are sold with no added sugar. The leading baby food corporation must put an end to this harmful double standard.

'Flawed' argument: Gandhi had minimal role, naval mutinies alone led to Independence

Counterview Desk Reacting to a Counterview  story , "Rewiring history? Bose, not Gandhi, was real Father of Nation: British PM Attlee 'cited'" (January 26, 2016), an avid reader has forwarded  reaction  in the form of a  link , which carries the article "Did Atlee say Gandhi had minimal role in Independence? #FactCheck", published in the site satyagrahis.in. The satyagraha.in article seeks to debunk the view, reported in the Counterview story, taken by retired army officer GD Bakshi in his book, “Bose: An Indian Samurai”, which claims that Gandhiji had a minimal role to play in India's freedom struggle, and that it was Netaji who played the crucial role. We reproduce the satyagraha.in article here. Text: Nowadays it is said by many MK Gandhi critics that Clement Atlee made a statement in which he said Gandhi has ‘minimal’ role in India's independence and gave credit to naval mutinies and with this statement, they concluded the whole freedom struggle.

Can voting truly resolve the Kashmir issue? Past experience suggests optimism may be misplaced

By Raqif Makhdoomi*  In the politically charged atmosphere of Jammu and Kashmir, election slogans resonated deeply: "Jail Ka Badla, Vote Sa" (Jail’s Revenge, Vote) and "Article 370 Ka Badla, Vote Sa" (Article 370’s Revenge, Vote). These catchphrases dominated the assembly election campaigns, particularly across Kashmir. 

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Will Bangladesh go Egypt way, where military ruler is in power for a decade?

By Vijay Prashad*  The day after former Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina left Dhaka, I was on the phone with a friend who had spent some time on the streets that day. He told me about the atmosphere in Dhaka, how people with little previous political experience had joined in the large protests alongside the students—who seemed to be leading the agitation. I asked him about the political infrastructure of the students and about their political orientation. He said that the protests seemed well-organized and that the students had escalated their demands from an end to certain quotas for government jobs to an end to the government of Sheikh Hasina. Even hours before she left the country, it did not seem that this would be the outcome.