AAP's subsidy on Electricity Bills in Delhi; unsound economically, legally and administratively

Political Leadership must have an in-depth and comprehensive economic, administrative, political and cultural understanding, coupled with a clear & viable vision of what is good for the People and the Country as a whole -- as also the acumen to plan and execute a systematic programme, with the help of all segments of Society, for achieving the Objectives set out by his/her Government/Party.

It is for the Leader to scientifically evaluate as to how his/her country’s Human and Geographical assets and resources can be optimally utilised for the overall, inclusive and sustainable development of his/her country and its people -- with minimal adverse environmental impact and with the least possible danger to Public Health & Safety. He/she is expected to ‘lead’ and guide the Masses -- as also the Government machinery (bureaucracy) in that direction.

Let us take the example of AAP’s Electoral promise of ‘reducing electricity bills of all the people in Delhi by one-half’.

The easiest and the most unwise way to achieve the above Objective is to cut-down the electric supply to one-half. An equally foolish and more irrational option is to subsidise the consumption of electricity for a certain segment of the population of Delhi -- because the latter Option will:

i) indirectly amount to subsidising the inefficiency, waste and profiteering by private Electric Power Distribution Companies in Delhi, by Companies that Generate Power (Sellers of power to Distribution Companies), by Vendors who supply Raw Materials or Infrastructural Materials to these two types of Companies, and by those who lease the Nation’s Natural Resources to such Vendors (‘vendors’ also include the Mining Companies, and ‘profiteering’ includes -- in the case of Government  Departments -- bribes and/or political donations);

ii) encourage wasteful ‘consumption’ of electricity by those who receive the subsidy -- thereby, reducing the availability of electricity to other segments of Society, unless the case of the State Government is that there is ‘excess power generation’ or ‘excess availability of power’ in Delhi (which is NOT its case);

iii) AAP’s proposal to get the ‘accounts’ of private Electric Power Distribution Companies in Delhi audited through the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) is not legally and administratively sound since CAG’s (Duties, Powers and Conditions of Service) Act 1971 -- read with Articles 149-151 of the Constitution of India and with [Section 619 (2) & (4) of the Companies Act 1956, as amended by Companies (Amendment) Act 2000] the corresponding provisions [s.139(5)] in Companies Act 2013, permits the CAG to audit only those Companies in which ‘equity participation’ of the Government is, at least, 51%; moreso, the terms ‘body’ and ‘authority’ in the clause “Any body or authority even though not substantially financed from the Consolidated Fund, at the request of the President or the Governor” cannot be construed as anything other than terms ejusdem generis to ‘Public Sector Undertakings’ and ‘Public Sector Enterprises’;  

iv) CAG may not have sufficient manpower that is properly trained to audit the accounts of ‘private’ companies;

v) such audit may also interfere with the Intellectual Property Rights of the said Companies, and may also breach the Terms of the Contracts which the previous Government(s) had executed with these Companies;

vi) additional and trained manpower can only be provided by the Central Government, not by State Government, to the CAG;

vii) only the Parliament can amend the aforesaid Act of 1971;

viii) CAG does not carry out any Audit either based upon Cost and Works Accounting methods or on ‘hidden’ Operational Costs to Companies (e.g. the ‘entertainment’ expenses upon bureaucrats or the ‘donations’ given to political parties, etc) or on the basis of Social Costs of the enterprise, or take into account the loss of Corporate Revenue due to ‘power-thefts’;

ix) subsidy will be given only to those who have electric supply -- obviously, ‘metered supply’;

x)in order to supply power to the maximum number of residences in Delhi, substantial additional investment on infrastructure (capital investment) will be needed -- such Companies as have only short-term Contracts for the Distribution of Electricity in Delhi, would be acting against common ‘business-sense’ if they make such huge investments on their own;

xi) how will the State Government generate funds required for aforesaid capital investment;

xii) perpetually subsidising electricity bills by asking for ‘donations’ from Traders is an anti-thesis of ‘sustainable’ development -- moreso, the Trader will eventually ‘transfer’ this extra financial burden onto his/her customers, i.e. the Delhites (the CM-designate said in a recent TV-Interview that his Party would ask for ‘donations’ from Traders to fill the gap in his Budgetary Deficit on account of such lollipops);

xiii) diverting Money from the honest Tax-Payers (who would have ‘invested’ the moneys that were taken away from them as ‘Taxes’ or as ‘Donations’) to recurring consumption by 3^rd parties, is totally irrational as an economic policy;

xiv) there is no mention whether the electricity Bills of business-premises will also be subsidised..

Good Governance cannot be based upon ‘ifs’ -- whether a BIG ‘If’ or a set of small ones.

No Judge of any High Court or Supreme Court has been ‘dismissed from service’ so far on the ground of 'corruption' by the President of the Republic of India -- no Lokpal is needed since the provision for Judges' impeachment through Indian Parliament (the Supreme Law-makers) already exists in our Constitution, and the President does enjoy more powers than any Lokpal ever will; nor have the Pensionary benefits of any Judge -- who has been forced to ‘resign’ by his own colleagues on the ground of overwhelming documentary evidence of ‘corruption’ against him/her, been ever forfeited. Even the money that he/she is alleged to have earned through illegal means (by misappropriation or by bribery) has never been recovered.

In these circumstances, who will draft a foolproof Legislation to curb corruption? Who will get it honestly implemented? Who will sincerely ensure that an infallible case is prepared, pleaded and argued before the court against the corrupt public servant? Who will supervise that the court acts impartially and expeditiously?

The Writ Courts alone have the wherewithal to take upon themselves the task of ensuring that all the 3 Organs of the State and the Fourth Estate discharge their Rajya-Dharma.

But that takes us back to square one -- who will bell the writ court? Will you -- either individually or through your business entity, dare to do that? If we can’t, let us not expect Delhi State Assembly’s Legislators to do that -- nor have they, in any case, done so till date. Moreso, Legislators of all State Legislatures are subject to the jurisdiction of Writ Courts under the Contempt of Courts Act if these Legislators criticise the conduct of any court -- even on the floor of the Legislative Assembly of the State. A Judge’s conduct can be criticised only on the floor of Lok Sabha and/or Rajya Sabha.

'Ifs' only take us to Alice's Wonderland -- dreams.

I have much better alternatives -- which I am willing to share if I am paid 10 percent of the ‘savings’ that my Plans would effect in State Government’s expenditure on the above lollipops for the next 5 years; and it pays 1% of the said savings to me in advance -- instead of passing my Bills piecemeal on payment of ‘bribe’ for each and every Bill (which the Pay & Accounts Offices notoriously charge per Bill).