Opinion Crude excuses
It says that in 2010-2011,the contribution of the petroleum sector to the Centre was Rs 1,36,000 crore and to the states,about Rs 80,000 crore.
Crude excuses
The editorial in CPM journal Peoples Democracy focuses on the recent increase in the prices of petroleum products,claiming that the government was hoodwinking the people when it declared that the 5 per cent import duty on crude oil had been withdrawn. As a matter of fact,the UPA 2 government imposed this tax in the Union budget of 2010 despite strong opposition,including a cut motion in the Lok Sabha by the opposition parties, it says. The editorial argues that reducing taxes was ineffective without restructuring of indirect taxes both at the Centre and the states.
It says that in 2010-2011,the contribution of the petroleum sector to the Centre was Rs 1,36,000 crore and to the states,about Rs 80,000 crore. The subsidy provided by the government including the oil bonds issued on the public sector oil marketing companies during the same period is Rs 40,000 crore,which is 20 per cent of petroleum sectors contribution in taxes and duties. Aam admi pays Rs 100 as taxes/duties and gets Rs 20 as so-called subsidy! …Who is subsidising whom? it asks. Claiming that petroleum products worth Rs 1 lakh crore were being exported by private refineries,it asks why are these incentives not being withdrawn?
Fair warning
After the draft CAG report on Krishna-Godavari basin gas contracts,an article by CITU leader Dipankar Mukherjee in Peoples Democracy demands that accountability be fixed. He says the government had informed the Rajya Sabha as early as 2006 that the private consortium had submitted a development plan that envisaged increase in production from 40 to 80 mmscmd and increase in expenditure from $2.47 billion to $8.84 billion. From then on,he says, CPM MPs had written several letters to the PM and petroleum minister seeking the governments intervention,claiming that the expenditure per unit of production had been inflated abnormally. The PM was urged to stop gold-plating and ensure that the price of gas was not arbitrarily increased.
No action was taken other than mere acknowledgement, he says and argues that,later,the then chief minister of Andhra Pradesh,Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy,also expressed similar apprehension in letters to the PM. The article says that the cabinet secretary who was asked to look into the matter also suggested that the government in consultation with the CAG appoint an international auditor who has sufficient experience in the field of oil exploration and production. The report was sent to the PMO. Did the prime minister/government consult CAG and appoint an international auditor? Who should be blamed for not taking any preventive step to stop the revenue loss,though cautioned repeatedly by CPM MPs,AP chief minister and even the cabinet secretary? Where should the buck stop?
Nuclear folly
Saying that the Nuclear Suppliers Group has passed a new set of guidelines restricting transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technologies to countries that have not signed the NPT,the editorial in CPI journal New Age says Prime Minister Singh owes an explanation to the nation.
Singh had,it says,insisted on concluding the nuclear deal under US pressure: To achieve this goal,his dispensation not only indulged in the dirty game of cash for vote but also made false promises… the PM personally assured the Lok Sabha that the NSG agreed to waive all restrictions.
Share
