Disinvestment Minister Arun Shourie on Wednesday told the Rajya Sabha that the government would ensure strategic and security concerns of the nation by keeping Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), Gas Authority of India (Gail) and ONGC out of the list of disinvestment. Replying to the 15th debate on Disinvestment in Parliament, Shourie stated that a Disinvestment Fund would be set up soon, maybe in the Budget itself, to utilise the proceeds from privatisation for retiring public debt, infrastructure and social development.Assuring that about 80 per cent of retail trade of oil will remain with the government even after privatisation of HPCL and BPCL, Shourie said all necessary provisions were being incorporated in the shareholders agreement of the two oil PSUs to ensure that national security concerns were fully addressed. Addressing the objections raised by Opposition parties about disinvesting HPCL and BPCL without Parliament nod, Shourie stated that the Attorney General had made it clear that no parliamentary approval was required for the sale of these two companies which were taken over by the government in 1974 and 1976 through an Act of Parliament.The minister said these two companies were governed by Companies Act unlike in the case of Coal India and public sector banks taken over under Coal Nationalisation and Bank Nationalisation Acts which specifically state that these would remain with the government.‘‘Under the Coal Nationalisation Act it was clearly stated only the government was allowed to be in the area od coal mining,’’ Shourie stated. ‘‘To allow any private party to come in, Parliament would have to amend this act,’’ he explained. Similarly, the government would have to come before Parliament for a decision if its stake in nationalised banks were to go down below 51 per cent as stated in the Act. ‘‘But certainly not for the two oil PSUs in which the previous governments have already divested 33 per cent and 49 per cent,’’ he said.‘‘There is no mystery as sought to be made out,’’ in the AG’s report which was specific to the issue of whether Parliament nod was required for disinvestment of HPCL and BPCL and the AG cannot give anticipatory opinion on the share holders agreement before it is finalised.To the demand of several members that AG’s report should be tabled in Parliament as his opinion was sought at the behest of members’ demand, Shourie said he would consider and carry out the directions of the chair. During his reply Shourie pointed out the Delhi High Court had dismissed as withdrawn a petition challenging government’s decision to privatise the two oil companies.When members referred to the strike call given by trade unions of these two oil PSUs, he said the workers have changed their perception and they do not share the views of some Trade Union leaders which were political. He said INTUC leaders from HPCL and BPCL had met him and he had assured them that the government would fully protect the interest of workers and their wages.‘‘They went back satisfied that assured me they would not join the strike,’’ he said amidst protest from Left party members who accused Shourie of making wrong statements in the House.Asserting that national security was paramount, Shourie cited the VSNL example which provided all necessary clauses in the shareholders agreement required by intelligence agencies to enable them carry out whatever was needed in the interest of national security.Similarly, clauses regarding security would be provided in the share holders agreement of HPCL and BPCL to ensure uninterrupted supply by these companies.
