PSU Bank privatisation

Budget -21, Reform push and Time to Market!

There have been budgets in the past which have sort of quickly moved away from the headlines. And there have been budgets which remained in the headlines but for all wrong reasons. This year’s budget, incidentally the 8th one from the Modi Sarkar presented by Nirmala Sitharaman has managed to hog the limelight for all the “right” reasons. The pun here is well intended.

Talking of the reaction to this government’s previous budgets, it’s always been muted and for obvious reasons. Ever since Narendra Modi became the Prime Minister way back in 2014 that too with a clear majority, the expectation has been that he will bite the bullet on many of the much needed, long pending reforms. Honestly, the previous budgets of the Modi Sarkar were mostly incremental budgets with some increased allocations here, some improved programs there and so on. “What’s the Big Idea”? ‘Where are the Big bang reforms?” were some questions hurled by the commentariat post every budget. It has been my observation that under Modi, the budgets have just become an annual statement of allocations and outlays while Big Ideas whether it was the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan or the Ujjwala Yojana et al were launched outside of the budget. But in this year’s budget, there has been a welcome change to announcing some “Big Ideas”.

The positive vibes around this year’s budget can be attributed to the announcement of few big ideas which have been reformist in nature, while keeping the budget free of any “bad news”. One is the announcement of the setting up of an Asset Reconstruction Company (ARC) which is a euphemism for a “Bad Bank”. Second, is the statement of intent on “privatisation” of two Public Sector Undertaking Banks and one General Insurance company. So far, governments have been taking umbrage under the term – Disinvestment without putting out the word “Privatisation” so openly.

Not just the budget, but the announcement has been followed up by speeches in the parliament and other forums by those who matter in the government, on the seriousness of the intent. In fact, as per news reports, Niti Aayog has recommended to cut the number of state owned Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) to just 24 from over 300 that exist today. If this programme takes off, it will make Modi a reformist of “Thatcherian” proportions. If you recall, Margaret Thatcher way back in 1979, on assuming power systematically embarked on a reform program to revive the British economy. She deregulated markets, cut tax rates, removed exchange controls and consigned militant trade unions to oblivion. But, it is the privatisation of State owned corporations like British Steel, British Petroleum, British Telecom and British Airways that stays as her enduring legacy till today. So, what Thatcher achieved in the early 80’s in the United Kingdom is what Modi is embarking to do in India after forty years. That brings to the next point of this post which is the important piece of “Time to Market”.

In business, Time to Market is nothing but the time taken by a company to launch a product or a service from the date of firming up on an idea.  For companies, this is an important issue in new product introductions.  In businesses that are highly competitive or for that matter any business, you cannot afford to have a long Time to Market.  That would run the risk of your competitor getting ahead or consumer preferences changing that makes the idea less relevant or even redundant.  I believe that even in the matter of reforms for a government, a short Time to Market is critical. And as a country, our track record on that front is unenviable so far.

In the context of reform push, I believe there are three stages namely – Idea, Intent and Implementation. First, the idea is just floated in a budget speech or on important occasion/forum. Then the Intent is demonstrated when the idea is given a proper shape, laws are formulated if there is a need and resources are allocated.  Implementation is when finally the reform becomes a reality and is rolled out. So, in India if you see the history of Time to Market on important reforms, it doesn’t pose a pretty picture.

For example, take the case of a reform like Aadhaar. The idea and need for a unique citizens identity card was floated way back in 2001 by an Empanelled Group Of Ministers (EGOM) chaired by the then Home Minister L.K. Advani during the Vajpayee led NDA regime. It was only in 2009, when the intent was demonstrated by the UPA government led by Manmohan Singh with the announcement in the budget and then following it up with the set up if UIDAI (Unique Identification Authority of India) under the leadership of Nandan Nilekani. And finally, the first Aadhaar card was issued to a citizen in September 2010. So, from the idea to the launch it took a good 9 years. In the case of GST, from the time of the floating of the idea way back in 2000 to showing the intent in the budget in year 2005 to finally launching GST in India in 2017, it took seventeen years.

In the case of the policy of allowing 100% Foreign Direct Investment in retail however, from the stage of the Idea to Intent to Implementation, the landscape of retail has changed. India doesn’t still allow 100% FDI in multi brand retail. This was seen as an important reform in attracting FDI and employment generation a decade ago. But now with the advent of E-Commerce where 100% FDI is allowed in the marketplace model, 100% FDI in Multi-brand retail is no longer seen as a constraint. In other developing countries like Thailand foreign direct investment in retail gave a huge boost to the economy. But India missed that boom because of the dogma around FDI in multi brand retail which stretched the Time to Market on that reform.

Ergo my point is, if the reforms which have been announced in this budget have to make an impact, short Time to Market is critical. Having floated the Idea of a Bad Bank, it is important to follow up quickly with the formation of the ARC and eventually roll it out within this year itself so that the PSU banks can be freed of the stressed loans and they can get back to lending with more ease. Similarly, in the case of privatisation of PSU Banks, the idea has been floating for a while now. But this is the first time, the government has expressed its formal intent via the budget speech. The road to privatisation is not going to be easy at all with trade unions already gearing to pick up the gauntlet with the government. I though believe just as the mass VRS issue in PSUs like MTNL and BSNL etc. went through in spite of stiff resistance from trade unions, this time, the government may be able to pull it off with a few hiccups. Or so I hope.  Also, while the stock markets are on a high this year, the government can manage to get better valuations.

In the run up to the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, Modi repeatedly talked of “Less Government, More Governance” and “Government has no business to be in business” – thoughts which signalled a clear Rightward tilt on the economic philosophy front. However, till this budget speech, we didn’t see much of action towards withdrawing the government from running many businesses. This budget from that sense is critical in signalling the government’s intent towards moving away from running inconsequential businesses, which is a good sign. And, if the intent is translated into action in a reasonably short Time to Market, then it will be Narendra Modi’s lasting legacy in changing the economic course of this country.

Post Script: If Aandolanjivis are those who make a living out of protests, what about taxing them? And what would be the Time to Market for this idea? 😁

Can the ‘Gem of a scam” become “Gem of an opportunity’??

The debate on privatisation of Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) banks has a habit of rearing its head in public discourse in India with regular frequency. Not so long ago, it was when the PSU banks were hit by the NPA (Non-Performing Assets) crisis embodied by the likes of a fleeing Vijay Mallya. Later, it was when the Government finally took a call on recapitalisation of the PSU banks last year. And now, it is when the Nirav Modi – PNB scam, the latest to hit the Indian shores (and shares) surfaced. Yesterday even Arvind Subramanian, the usually reticent Chief Economic Advisor has joined the debate!

Reformists are of the view that the Government is betraying Winston Churchill again and again who famously said that “Never let a good crisis go waste” in the context of biting the PSU bank bullet. They are of the view that the repeated crises which hit the PSU banks provided a plausible excuse and “Gem of an opportunity” (pun entirely intended) for the Government of the day to privatize PSU Banks and thereby get out of the rigmarole of using tax payer’s money to keep bailing them out. The underlying assumptions being that the PSU Banks are run usually inefficiently and being under sarkaari control are subject to pulls and pressures.  While this is true for almost all PSUs in general, money being closer to the pocket and heart of the public, privatisation topic haunts the banks more. One cannot dismiss the very popular data point thrown in the above argument’s favour which is that the market cap of a relatively younger HDFC Bank which is privately held is higher than all PSU banks put together!

At the core of the argument against privatisation is of course the security it provides to the Aam Admi. Irrespective of what happens around the balance sheets of these PSU banks. The general public does believe that the Government will not let their savings go down the drain come what may. One remembers the furore and angst in WhatsApp groups recently when we were all told that our deposits above 1 lac are not safe if the banks go belly up. So, for any Government of the day, it is a minefield of a quandary to attempt privatisation of PSU banks unless it is completely politically immune to a public outrage and the after effects thereafter!

Be that as it may – the Government’s quandary I mean, the larger issue is the conflict bordering on hypocrisy in the minds of people like us which is – my direct stake in the bank by way of savings/deposits Vs my indirect stake in PSU banks by way of government’s stake which is in effect all our tax payer’s money. In short “My money” Vs “Our Money”! Nirav Modi has just swindled a government bank of few 1000 crores but that still is not “My money” though it is “Our Money!  And largely our outrage has stopped with laughing out loud (or is it laughing like Renuka these days?) looking at jokes, memes and sarcastic jibes on the Government while a smart cookie has “been crying all his way to the bank”! I think as individuals we are more concerned about the safety and security of our savings which we feel is protected if PSU banks remain as is – Government owned.  Even if that means

  • The Government of the day interfering in the day-to-day functioning
  • The Government mandating the banks to carry out populist programmes which may not make commercial sense but may make immense political sense to them
  • Mounting NPA’s due to favouring cronies of the likes of Vijay Mallya
  • The Nirav Modi kind of frauds due to conniving staff
  • Less accountability in the system.

At the end of the day, as along as the banks are Government owned, the only fix for all the above ailments is injecting more capital which is by tapping into tax payer’s money. It’s obvious that the same money if not used for bailing out banks could be put to use for better roads, power, water, electricity or even for that matter the proposed grandiose Health Insurance programme – stuff our country has been deprived of in the last 70 years since Independence.

The 1.6 billion dollar question is whether as tax payers and citizens we are okay and ready to let the government seize the opportunity and privatise the PSU banks? My guess is maybe we are not. And this stems from our socialistic belief that next to God, the Government is the savior and hence must protect us. And the constant fear associated with losing our money if not protected by the government.

In a country like ours which is evolving and is still a work in progress on many fronts like urbanization, education, social mobility,..,… the fear is mostly legitimate. Coupled with the fact that the private sector has not fully covered itself with glory. But the performance of the new private banks set up since the opening up of the economy in 1993, provide quite a lot of hope. For example, as far as we know, the new private banks are not part of the NPA problem.  Even during the 2008 Lehman shock, when all over the world financial institutions were rocked and many went belly up, in India none of the banks including the private ones were affected so much (though banks like ICICI had exposures to the subprime crisis) due to very strong regulations in India.  So, so far we could bank on these banks!

In summary, my point is may be if not all in one go, the Government could contemplate privatising PSU banks in batches of say 2 starting with the smaller ones. This will give adequate space to watch out for any pitfalls in the process and fine tune the same. This of course with the continued strong regulatory frame work in place.  The smooth completion of the ongoing privatisation of Air India may give the much needed heft to the Government.

With may be all banks out of governmental control in the next 10 years, the frequent exercise of tapping into “Our Money” to protect “My money” may be a conundrum of the past. The moot question remains if this current “Gem of a scam” will be turned into a “Gem of an opportunity” by the Government and that we as public will let that pass!

Postscript: Overheard in a lift: “These jewelers kept telling us that Diamonds are forever. But, they never told us that loans are also forever! Saala vaapas hi nahi kiya!!!

Toon courtesy: Satish Acharya