Disinvesting in PSEs in line with Common Minimum Programme: Mukherjee

Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee on Tuesday said the recent decision to disinvest in public sector enterprises (PSEs) was in line with the National Common Minimum Programme (NCMP) that had the support of the Left parties from May 2004 to July 2008.

Responding to questions in the Lok Sabha on a Calling Attention Motion on disinvestment, Mr. Mukherjee made this assertion to challenge CPI (M)leader Basudeb Acharia’s contention that the government was facilitating “creeping privatisation” in the guise of “people’s ownership” of PSEs.

Stating that Mr. Acharia was entitled to hold on to his philosophy, Mr. Mukherjee said. Referring to Mr. Acharia’s statement that the Left parties had successfully stopped disinvestment in the first edition of the United Progressive Alliance, the Minister said the government had sold its shares in as many as seven PSEs between May 2004 and 2007. At the same time, he conceded that the Left parties had succeeded in blocking disinvestment in some cases.

To Mr. Acharia’s specific question on whether the government would be prepared to review the plan to disinvest, Mr. Mukherjee said: “Yes, it can happen if you get 272 seats” in the Lok Sabha. Stating that the government had opted for limited disinvestment to check the fiscal deficit, he added: “We cannot afford to have 6.8 per cent fiscal deficit. Fiscal prudence demands that we return to FRBM (Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management).”

Given the concerns expressed in certain quarters about the government dipping into the National Investment Fund, the Minister sought to assure the House that the proceeds of disinvestment would be used only for capital expenditure requirements of selected social sector programmes.

Urging the Left parties to recognise the changed dynamics of today’s world, he said: “The world is moving and we need to keep pace with this world. Twenty-five years ago, we could not have given Rs. 500 crore as debt relief. Today, Rs. 71,000 crore is being given as debt relief. If we had not changed our policy, we would not have been able to do this.”