|
( I ) The
Initial Phase
The
policy of the Government on disinvestment has evolved over a period and
it can be briefly stated in the form of following policy statements made
in the chronological order :
Interim
Budget 1991-92 (Chandrashekhar Government)
The
policy, as enunciated by the Chandrashekhar Government, was to divest
up to 20% of the Government equity in selected PSEs in favour of public
sector institutional investors. The objective of the policy was
stated to be to broad-base equity, improve management, enhance availability
of resources for these PSEs and yield resources for the exchequer.
| "
It has been decided that Government would disinvest up to 20 per cent
of its equity in selected public sector undertakings, in favour of
mutual funds and financial or investment institutions in the public
sector. The disinvestment, which would broad base the equity, improve
management and enhance the availability of resources for these enterprises,
is also expected to yield Rs. 2,500 crores to the exchequer in 1991-92.
The modalities and details of implementing this decision, which are
being worked out, would be announced separately." |
Industrial
Policy Statement of 24th July,1991
The
Industrial Policy Statement of 24th July 1991 stated that the government
would divest part of its holdings in selected PSEs, but did not place
any cap on the extent of disinvestment. Nor did it restrict disinvestment
in favour of any particular class of investors. The objective for disinvestment
was stated to be to provide further market discipline to the performance
of public enterprises.
| "
In the case of selected enterprises, part of Government holdings in
the equity share capital of these enterprises will be disinvested
in order to provide further market discipline to the performance of
public enterprises ". |
Budget speech: 1991-92
In
this pronouncement, the cap of 20% for disinvestment was reinstated and
the eligible investors' universe was again modified to consist of mutual
funds and investment institutions in the public sector and the workers
in these firms. The objectives too were modified, the modified objectives
being: "to raise resources, encourage wider public participation and promote
greater accountability".
| "In
order to raise resources, encourage wider public participation and
promote greater accountability, up to 20 per cent of Government equity
in selected public sector undertakings would be offered to mutual
funds and investment institutions in the public sector, as also to
workers in these firms". |
Report
of the Committee on the Disinvestment of Shares in PSEs (Rangarajan Committee):
April 1993
The
Rangarajan Committee recommendations emphasised the need for substantial
disinvestment. It stated that the percentage of equity to be divested
could be up to 49% for industries explicitly reserved for the public sector.
It recommended that in exceptional cases, such as the enterprises which
had a dominant market share or where separate identity had to be maintained
for strategic reasons, the target public ownership level could be kept
at 26%, that is, disinvestment could take place to the extent of 74%.
In all other cases, it recommended 100% divestment of Government stake.
Holding of 51% or more equity by the Government was recommended only for
6 Schedule industries, namely:
| I. |
Coal and lignite |
| II. |
Mineral oils |
| III.
|
Arms,
ammunition and defence equipment |
| IV. |
Atomic
energy |
| V.
|
Radioactive
minerals, & |
| VI.
|
Railway
transport |
The
Common Minimum Programme of the United Front Government: 1996
The
highlights of the policy formulated by the United Front Government were,
as follows:
To carefully examine the public sector non-core strategic areas;
To set up a Disinvestment Commission for advising on the disinvestment
related matters;
To take and implement decisions to disinvest in a transparent manner;
Job security, opportunities for retraining and redeployment to be assured.
No
disinvestment objective was, however, mentioned in the policy statement.
| "
The question of withdrawing the public sector from non-core strategic
areas will be carefully examined subject, however, to assuring the
workers and employees of job security or, in the alternative, opportunities
for retraining and redeployment. The United Front Government will
establish a Disinvestment Commission to advise the government on these
steps. Any decision to disinvest will be taken and implemented in
a transparent manner ". |
Disinvestment
Commission Recommendations: Feb.1997- Oct. 1999
Pursuant
to the above policy of the United Front Government, a Disinvestment Commission
was formed in 1996. It made recommendations on 58 PSEs. The recommendations
indicated a shift from public offerings to strategic / trade sales, with
transfer of management, as the following table shows :
| Mode
of disinvestment recommended |
Number
of PSEs
|
|
A.
Involving change in ownership / management
1 . Strategic sale
2 . Trade sale
|
29
08
|
| B.
Involving no change in ownership / management Offer of shares
|
05
|
C.
No change
1. Disinvestment deferred
2. No disinvestment |
11
01
|
| D.
Closure / sale of assets |
04
|
| GRAND
TOTAL |
58
|
(
II ) The Second Phase
Budget Speech: 1998-99
In
its first budgetary pronouncement, the new Government decided to bring
down Government shareholding in the PSUs to 26% in the generality of cases,
(thus facilitating ownership changes, as was recommended by the Disinvestment
Commission). It however, stated that the Government would retain majority
holdings in PSEs involving strategic considerations and that the interests
of the workers would be protected in all cases.
| "Government
have also decided that in the generality of cases, the Government
shareholding in public sector enterprises will be brought down to
26 per cent. In cases of public sector enterprises involving strategic
considerations, government will continue to retain majority holding.
The interest of workers shall be protected in all cases". |
Budget Speech: 1999-2000
The
policy for 1999 - 2000, as enunciated by the Government, was to strengthen
strategic PSUs, privatise non-strategic PSUs through gradual disinvestment
or strategic sale and devise viable rehabilitation strategies for weak
units. A highlight of the policy was that the expression 'privatisation'
was used for the first time.
| "Government's
strategy towards public sector enterprises will continue to encompass
a judicious mix of strengthening strategic units, privatising non-strategic
ones through gradual disinvestment or strategic sale and devising
viable rehabilitation strategies for weak units". |
Strategic & Non-strategic
Classification
On
16th March 1999, the Government classified the Public Sector Enterprises
into strategic and non-strategic areas for the purpose of disinvestment.
It was decided that the Strategic Public Sector Enterprises would be those
in the areas of :
Arms and ammunitions and the allied items of defence equipment, defence
air-crafts and warships;
Atomic energy (except in the areas related to the generation of nuclear
power and applications of radiation and radio-isotopes to agriculture
medicine and non-strategic industries);
Railway transport.
All
other Public Sector Enterprises were to be considered non-strategic. For
the non-strategic Public Sector Enterprises, it was decided that the reduction
of Government stake to 26% would not be automatic and the manner and pace
of doing so would be worked out on a case-to-case basis. A decision in
regard to the percentage of disinvestment i.e., Government stake going
down to less than 51% or to 26%, would be taken on the following considerations:
Whether the industrial
sector requires the presence of the public sector as a countervailing
force to prevent concentration of power in private hands, and
Whether
the industrial sector requires a proper regulatory mechanism to protect
the consumer interests before Public Sector Enterprises are privatised.
Budget speech: 2000 - 2001
The
highlights of the policy for the year 2000 - 01 were that for the first
time the Government made the statement that it was prepared to reduce
its stake in the non-strategic PSEs even below 26% if necessary, that
there would be increasing emphasis on strategic sales and that the entire
proceeds from disinvestment / privatisation would be deployed in social
sector, restructuring of PSEs and retirement of public debt. The main
elements of the policy were reiterated as follows:
To restructure and revive potentially viable PSEs;
To close down PSEs which cannot be revived;
To bring down Government equity in all non-strategic PSEs to 26% or lower,
if necessary;
To fully protect the interests of workers;
To put in place mechanisms to raise resources from the market against
the security of PSEs' assets for providing an adequate safety-net to workers
and employees;
To establish a systematic policy approach to disinvestment and privatisation
and to give a fresh impetus to this programme, by setting up a new Department
of Disinvestment;
To emphasize increasingly on strategic sales of identified PSEs;
To use the entire receipt from disinvestment and privatisation for meeting
expenditure in social sectors, restructuring of PSEs and retiring public
debt.
|
"Government's
policy towards the public sector is clear and unambiguous. Its main
elements are: -
Restructure and revive potentially viable PSUs;
Close down PSUs which cannot be revived;
Bring down Government equity in all non-strategic PSUs to 26% or
lower, if necessary; and
Fully protect the interests of workers.
In
line with this policy during the last two years financial restructuring
of 20 PSUs has been approved by the Government. As a result, many
PSUs have been able to restructure their operations, improve productivity
and achieve a turn around in performance. Hon'ble members are aware
that Government have recently approved a comprehensive package for
restructuring of SAIL, one of our Navaratna PSUs.
There are many PSUs which are sick and not capable of being revived.
The only remaining option is to close down these undertakings after
providing an acceptable safety net for the employees and workers.
Resources under the National Renewal Fund have not been sufficient
to meet the cost of Voluntary Separation Scheme (VSS) for such PSUs.
At the same time, these PSUs have assets, which if unbundled and
realised, can be used for funding VSS. Government will put in place
mechanisms to raise resources from the market against the security
of these assets and use these funds to provide an adequate safety-net
to workers and employees.
Government
have recently established a new Department for Disinvestment to
establish a systematic policy approach to disinvestment and privatisation
and to give a fresh impetus to this programme, which will emphasize
increasingly on strategic sales of identified PSUs. Government equity
in all non-strategic PSUs will be reduced to 26% or less and the
interests of the workers will be fully protected. The entire receipt
from disinvestment and privatisation will be used for meeting expenditure
in social sectors, restructuring of PSUs and retiring public debt."
|
Address
by the President to Parliament in the Budget Session (February, 2001)
"The
public sector has played a vital role in the development of our economy.
However, the nature of this role cannot remain frozen to what it was conceived
fifty years ago - a time when the technological landscape, and the national
and international economic environment were so very different. The private
sector in India has come of age, contributing substantially to our nation-building
process. Therefore, both the public sector and private sector need to
be viewed as mutually complementary parts of the national sector. The
private sector must assume greater public responsibilities just as the
public sector needs to focus more on achieving results in a highly competitive
market. While some public enterprises are making profits, quite a few
have accumulated huge losses. With public finances under intense pressure,
Governments are just not able to sustain them much longer. Accordingly,
the Centre as well as several State Governments are compelled to embark
on a programme of disinvestment.
The
Governments' approach to PSUs has a three-fold objective: revival of potentially
viable enterprises; closing down of those PSUs that cannot be revived;
and bringing down Government equity in non-strategic PSUs to 26 percent
or lower. Interests of workers will be fully protected through attractive
VRS and other measures. This programme has already achieved some initial
successes. The Government has decided to disinvest a substantial part
of its equity in enterprises such as Indian Airlines, Air India, ITDC,
IPCL, VSNL, CMC, BALCO, Hindustan Zinc, and Maruti Udyog. Where necessary,
strategic partners would be selected through a transparent process".
|
Budget Speech: 2001
- 2002
Objectives
To use the proceeds for providing -
Restructuring assistance to PSUs
Safety net to workers
Reduction of debt burden
Additional budgetary support for the Plan, primarily in the social
and infrastructure sectors (contingent upon realisation of
the anticipated receipt.)
|
| "Given
the advanced stage of the process of disinvestment in many of
these companies, I am emboldened to take credit for a receipt
of Rs 12000 crore from disinvestment during the next year. An
amount of Rs 7000 crore out of this will be used for providing
restructuring assistance to PSUs, safety net to workers and
reduction of debt burden. A sum of Rs 5000 crore will be used
to provide additional budgetary support for the Plan primarily
in the social and infrastructure sectors. This additional allocation
for the plan will be contingent upon realisation of the anticipated
receipts. In consultation with Planning Commission I shall come
up with sectoral allocation proposals during the course of the
year." |
|
|