It’s been my oft repeated theme that privatisation hasn’t been good for the nation. Let’s see that in perspective and perhaps clear my own doubts too. I don’t claim to be an economist and this is based on my observations. I maybe wrong but then the idea is to stimulate a debate.

The goal of private sector is to challange the established natural monopolies. This is hoped that it would lead to better customer service or outreach. However, the fact remains that overall control should remain with the Government which should create a conducive atmosphere for the businesses. The reason for the control is that Governments are answerable to the people and it’s these institutions that are proxy ruled by people power.

This is an idealised scenario. Coming to telecom, this is one of the most crucial sectors of any nation. Be it war or peace, we need to have the public control over the assets. While in theory it does sound good to have investments flowing in, fact remains that the vested interests of the multinationals are detrimental to the nation’s interests. A glaring example is that of the manufacturing telecom equipment. I have already mentioned earlier that Indian industry could have been incubated, though we chose to rely on foreign manufacturers. We got in the outside network, spent our foreign exchange, spend money to pay them for after sales and royalties for using their standards (as for Qualacomm).

For me, it’s the national interest that comes in first. As I had pointed out, South Korea acted in it’s own national interest. Now, it is a world leader in broadband connectivity.

In any case, name any instance where the entry of private players has lead to better services. It’s TRAI’s own surveys that claim the level of congestion in services. I see the newspapers everyday which has scores of people complaining about their service provider. Many people who swear by billing hassles because their bills don’t just add up to their usage patterns. Worst, these people aren’t accountable because the regulator isn’t affective.

In this scenario,privatisation is mandated only if there are proper mechanisms in place.

What is the way out? Is privatisation the panacea for all ills? The answer is emphatic no. Yet, we must all speak out in one voice to make the institutions accountable. I am sick and tired of their double speak. At times, when I read that Broadband prices are one of the lowest in the world, I feel like wringing the writer’s neck. Nothing flames me up than spreading canards and lies.

It’s the industry associations, by way of money power speak out through media. Huge ad spends means that these “leaders of tomorrow” have the papermen chase them to their toilets and sign up endorsements. Where is the freedom of press?The worst off when they claim to keep the consumer interest tantamount though their actions are to the contrary.

Keeping all these factors in mind, we ought to be self reliant and force these companies to invest in the human capital in this nation. Importing is not wrong but not in the long term. As I had mentioned before, it was Space programme that has made us a viable aspirational superpower. I was reading about the world class Brahmos missile, that has been made in collaboration with Russians. Something that is far superior to anything in the world at present. We can do it but we need to pull ourselves out of the muck created by mini fiefdoms.

Democracy can rule only if the “powers that be” are made accountable. This blog is little step in that direction. I cannot do it all alone but need your help to make it possible.

This isn’t related to telecom. But China’s actions are detrimental to one and all.

I have no love lost for the Chinese or their stooges in India- they are severely compromising the national security. Each time I switch on the crappy plasticky extension on my computer (the Huawei modem), I realise the grave threat every time.

Now Chinese are deliberately witholding the information on bird flu Just a reminder of all sorts that anything can happen with these slitty eyes.

The potential problem of underreporting may not only be technical. There are also claims that Chinese medical personnel have been arrested for trying to report cases(!!!). China enforced severe restrictions on the investigation and reporting of suspected cases of bird flu in June 2005.

Well, SARS was a total outbreak when Chinese were egg faced.

Here’s another. For all those who claim that China is “going up by leaps and bounds”, here is a sobering statistic.

Check out these numbers from Indian Economy blog Incidentally, they reported that this blog isn’t available from China! They might have well blocked it. For me, well, I am far away from the commies.

Point is, that telecom is virtually a non starter. Chinese are desperate to make a mark. Chinese typically operate as if they have been put under disadvantage by others. Hence they pull out all stops to achieve their “goal” by hook or crook.

That isnt good news for India.

I can hardly add more to the benefits of Open Source.

However, I am worried that Micrsoft is spreading it’s tentacles in Government Enterprises. While this wouldn’t have been an issue of concern elsewhere, I believe that tax payer’s money would have been better used that licences for Microsoft. Mainly because the Total Cost of Ownership rises drastically. With every release, Microsoft forces the users to upgrade. Of course, it is a crappy lousy Operating system. I am ready to hug anyone from BSNL than use Microsoft.

That’s a deal! BSNL is still lesser of the two evils.

Andy Oram discusses the impact of Microsoft lobbying on Massachussets attempt for Open Source. Fascinating read because it concerns our nation as well. Specially with the stress on E governance.

I quote selectively:

Because the whole thrust of choosing an open document standard is to improve transparency in government, one could hardly find a cleverer complaint than to accuse the proponents of lack of transparency.

“….government staff for doing what they should be doing:going out into public forums and exchanging ideas with the communities affected by their decisions. Especially in a major paradigm shift, and especially when dealing with open standards that have far-flung communities.”

Well true. Yet, how much initiative do we see from the glorified son in laws to reach out to people and see for themselves the impact of their decisions?