Parakh’s book is fair, instructive

The book by former coal secretary P.C. Parakh, which was released on Monday and casts light on what came to be known as “Coalgate” in the Manmohan Singh years, appears from reported accounts to be intrinsically different from the deliberately racy output with a slant of a former media adviser to the Prime Minister.

While the tittle-tattle feature of the latter, launched a few days earlier, seeks to hurt the PM’s public standing and aims to “expose” the Congress and its leader, Mrs Sonia Gandhi, in the election season, the recounting of the corruption in the system by Mr Parakh (thought to be an upright officer) — in the matter of coal block allotments — is instructive. It takes us to the heart of the institutional decay in India’s governance systems whose provenance can be traced to long before Dr Singh came to head the two UPA governments.

The former coal czar could well have a point when he says that had the Prime Minister been able to push through reforms in the system of coal block allocations (through auctions and e-marketing, thereby removing discretion at the level of high officials at the political or administrative levels), something he desired, it is possible Coalgate may have been averted.

Two quick points need to be made here, although not as caveats. One, Dr Singh isn’t the first leader in India or elsewhere in the world who has been obstructed by sloth, bureaucratic manipulations, or political venality or commercial interests from reaching at least some of his goals.

Indeed, in the coal allocation scam, senior officials and political leaders from all coal-producing states — which meant from political parties as diverse as the BJP and the CPM, besides the Congress — sought to influence the allocation of coal blocks. Two, while the auction route seems somewhat safer (from the point of view of avoiding or reducing corruption) and probably more efficient, it is conceivable that cartelisation could occur in the auction process, producing other ways to stoke corruption.

Nevertheless, Mr Parakh’s basic point is well-merited and its validity could extend to the exploitation of natural resources other than coal (spectrum, for instance, the subject of another scandal). The coal issue is before the SC, of course, and it will have the final say on the involvement (or collusion, as alleged by the Opposition), if any, of the Prime Minister’s Office. However, the former coal secretary has thought fit to note, “The PM gave me full support. He also supported reforms in the coal ministry. We were able to get many things done because of his proactive role.” Mr Parakh’s criticisms, for this very reason, need to be taken on board.