Indian Finance Minister P. Chidambaram and Reserve Bank Governor
Raghuram Rajan are on an “India story” roadshow in the U.S. this week,
and they’re not pulling any punches.
Speaking at the Carnegie Endowment think-tank on
Thursday Mr. Chidambaram offered a stout, unapologetic defence of the
Indian economy’s prospects and key policy decisions that have guided it
thus far.
On the one hand he expressed optimism about the fact
that India was on a growth trajectory that would see its Gross Domestic
Product double every decade.
He was hopeful, he said, that combined with the U.S.
Federal Reserve’s decision to postpone the tapering of its quantitative
easing policy, India’s gains from a good monsoon would boost the
benefits coming out of economic reforms and produce a growth rate of at
least five per cent in 2013-14.
Mr. Chidambaram added, “I know that the World Economic
Outlook report does not share my optimism, but I may tell you that we
do not share their pessimism. Set against the current global economic
background, even a growth rate of 5.0 per cent looks good, but is much
lower than the ambitious standards that we set for ourselves in 2004.”
The Finance Minister however qualified his remarks on
the upside of the economy admitting that further institutional reform
was required, particularly of Indian regulators in some areas, who in
some cases “have not done their job as well as I would have liked them
to do,” and more had to be done to free these regulators from the
“clutches” of “administrative ministries” that exercised control over
them.
He also conceded that looking back at the two terms of
rule under the UPA government some policy decisions “could have been
done differently,” although he argued that the political context
mattered for economic policies.
In this context Mr. Chidambaram said that if there had
been some sense that the second and third financial stimuli that the
government provided after the 2008 global economic crisis were
excessive and could have led to “busting” the fiscal deficit limits and
raising the spectre of higher inflation, the government may have
avoided that course.
Yet during the interaction here he pushed back strongly
on some suggestions that India needed to do more for foreign investors,
in particular explaining the Indian government’s concern with avoiding
international arbitration that could “highjack” national systems of
jurisprudence.
He also said foreign investors had to adopt a “Take it
as it is,” approach to certain policy decisions such as the ones in the
multi-brand retail sector. Instead, he said, some foreign investors
were “always asking for more like Oliver Twist.”
No comments:
Post a Comment