|
India
needs uniformity in its approach to regulatory reforms:
Montek Singh Ahluwalia
New Delhi, May 18, 2010
|
“The approach to
regulation in India is ad-hoc. The purpose of the
draft regulatory reform bill is to bring in
uniformity in various approaches to regulatory
reforms in India. The issue of accountability to
the consumers is extremely important. Civil
society could play an important role in ensuring
that regulatory capture does not occur, since it
handicaps independence of regulatory agencies”
said Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Deputy Chairman,
Planning Commission of India. He was speaking at a
public forum organised by CUTS and CUTS Institute
for Regulation and Competition (CIRC) to discuss
the draft regulatory reform bill developed by the
Planning Commission.. He observed that CUTS should
lead the process of preparing a statement to
approach regulatory coherence in India.
In the opening
session, Pradeep Mehta, Secretary General of CUTS
mentioned that the bill lays down a cohesive
approach to regulation. There are several common
factors such as independence, accountability,
which needs to be universal. The bill does not
suggest setting up of a super regulator but aims
to simplify the process of regulatory reforms in
India.
While presenting
the Bill, Gajendra Haldea, Advisor to the Deputy
Chairman of the Planning Commission emphasised
that the draft bill is being presented in public
domain for eliciting views on the nature and
extent of legislative action necessary for
reforming the regulation of key infrastructure
sectors in India.
E. M. S.
Natchiappan, MP said that to ensure independence
to regulatory commissions, it is important to find
ways to deal with the bureaucracy. Dhanendra
Kumar, Chairman, Competition Commission of India
emphasised on the importance of mandatory
consultations between the competition body and
sectoral regulators. S. L. Rao, Former Chairman,
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission
recognised the importance of the draft bill and
observed that it should be adopted without further
delays. Pradip Baijal, Former Chairman, Telecom
Regulatory Authority of India argued that in order
to make our regulators more accountable there
should be a better parliamentary oversight of
their actions. L. Mansingh, Chairperson, Petroleum
and Natural Gas Regulatory Board suggested that
this bill should also be discussed among the
regulatory community at large. Shirish Deshpande,
Chairman, Mumbai Grahak Panchayat stressed on the
need to reflect issues pertaining to consumer
protection in a regulatory law and to develop a
consumer advocacy fund. T. C. A.
Srinivasa-Raghavan, Associate Editor, The Hindu
Business Line asserted that the licensing process
often sparks anti-competitive behaviour.
The discourse was
attended by a large number of stakeholders from
among government officials, regulators, academia
and lawyers. It was debated that for the Indian
economy to achieve and sustain a high rate of
growth, the creation of quality infrastructure is
critical. It is estimated that India needs more
than a trillion dollars of investment in
infrastructure. It was highlighted that such a
large magnitude of investment cannot come from the
public sector alone. The private sector, too, will
have to be persuaded to invest more. It is
important that the markets are regulated properly
so that non-market risks are minimised through a
predictable legal environment.
Arun Maira, Member,
Planning Commission of India concluded the
discussion by saying that institutions evolve over
time and a more participatory mechanism should be
in place to sustain the process of developing a
better regulatory culture in India. It will be
better to have a soft law approach, a policy
statement, to deal with cross-cutting issues such
as independence and accountability of regulators
and their relations with the legislature,
executive and judiciary.
For
further information please contact:
Udai Singh Mehta,
usm@cuts.org; +91 98292 85926
Vijay Singh,
vs2@cuts.org; +91 99102 64084
Archives
|
