Modi vs Tharoor

Narendra Modi made an uncharitable comment on Shashi Tharoor and his wife. The latter shot back saying that one must be capable of loving in order to understand the value of relationship.

Both should have exercised restraint in voicing their views. That said, one is amused that Tharoor is back in the ministry. Was there any enquiry into the circumstances which forced him to resign? How has situation changed now?

Modi and Tharoor have been brought up in different cultures. Modi thinks abstinence is a virtue. Enjoyment and celebration are the core of life for Tharoor. Each is entitled to his personal views. The differences need not be aired in public.

A letter to Prime Minister

Dear Hon.Prime Minister,

You have boldly exercised your prime ministerial privilege of reshuffling your ministry under Soniaji's direction.

You have also rightfully claimed that the ministry is now a balance of youth and experience. But your legendary modesty has restrained you from making the more legitimate claim of balance of efficiency and inefficiency and balance of the corrupt and the honest (or more accurately a balanced blend of the overtly corrupt and covertly corrupt). The aam admi will also notice the blend of royalty (Chandresh Kumari Katoch, sister of Maharaja of Jodhpur) and aristocracy (Shashi Tharoor of 'cattle class' fame).

More than a Prime Minister, you are an educator. You have successfully taught the ministers that they should not take their job seriously. Jaipal Reddy vainfully thought that his duty as Minister of Petroleum was to protect nation's interest by resisting the innovative accounting of the Reliance group. What an obscene thought! You have deftly removed Jaipal Reddy from that ministry. And you have brought in the more pliable Moily. I don't think that the presence of oil in his name is the only reason for this assignment.

Jairam Ramesh wanted to sanitise the country by taking the Sanitation portfolio seriously. You lost no time in transferring this portfolio to Bharatsinh Solanki.

The two ministers who have been taught not to take their job seriously have victory (Jai) in their name. If they really want to be victorious, they must learn to be like other ministers, that is to drift and not to take any initiative to protect nation's interests.

Your deft move must have sent a message to the other minister who thinks (what an atrocity!) that a minister must do justice to his / her portfolio. Jayanthi Natrajan must understand the irrelevance of one's portfolio in Manmohan Singh's cabinet. Why should she try to protect the environment when a minister's first and only duty is to protect the Gandhi family. She has got the reprieve now because she was ready to go out of the way to support Robert Vadra's dealings. She is on probation and must learn fast. She has 'Jay' in her name.

I appreciate your gesture in elevating Salman Khurshid and saving him from the embarrassment of behaving like a mafia don while continuing as Minister of Law and Justice. But my little mind is unable to understand why you have not utilised a golden chance to make Abhishek Manu Singhvi, the deciding authority on appointment of judges, the Minister of Law. Do you plan to make him the Chief Justice of India?

You have been unfair to S.M.Krishna. He had understood Globalisation much better than other ministers. Did he not read the Portugal minister's text in the U.N.? He has the vision to understand that in a globalised scenario, Portugal, Italy and India are all one and the same. Do you expect anything more from the Minister of External Affairs? But your move to make Khurshid the External Affairs Minister is very shrewd. When he invites ministers from foreign countries to visit India, he will also issue a challenge on how they will leave India.

Chiranjeevi as a minister is a smart move. After causing some catastrophe, he can legitimately claim he was only 'acting' and therefore not responsible for the consequences. You may remember that P.Chidambaram had earlier stated that a minister may approve / sign hundreds of notes every day and therefore you cannot make him responsible for all approvals. This noble principle must become a part of our Constitution to take the sting out of Arvind Kejriwal's venomous claims.

You have chosen Manish Tewari to silence any inconvenient person during cabinet meetings. You have taken the risk because you know nobody can silence you. Only if you speak you can be silenced.

There are two shortcomings which I request you to undo at the earliest. Please take back A.Raja in your Cabinet. He has not been more arbitrary than some of your other ministers. Anyway he has caused only 'zero loss'. (May be, is that why you are hesitating to take him back?) Secondly, Digvijaya Singh will be an asset to your ministry notwithstanding the presence of 'Vijay' in his name.

I know you have confidence in your new ministers. Now it is for them to live upto your expectations and create novel scams. Aam admi will be mightily pleased.

Yours Ever,
Gullible citizen.

Loud mouth in the ministry?

It is widely expected that Manish Tewari will enter the union ministry. And why not? He has proved his ability to defend all wrong acts without any compunction. Would he let any other minister speak in ministerial meetings?

Tewari is no doubt eloquent. But can eloquence substitute substance? If he joins the ministry, a big vacuum will arise in the group of Congress spokespeople whose only role is to defend the indefensisible and to ridicule the opposition.

Times of India reports that Tewari will be inducted with a view to lower the average age of ministers. Does it mean he does not deserve otherwise? Is this a deliberate viewpoint or an unintentional statement?

What will the prime minister do when Manish Tewari shouts in meetings? It will not make any difference to Manmohan Singh. For he never listens to anybody except Soniaji.

Why, and how much, do people cheat?

 Rajat Gupta continues to maintain that he has not contributed to insider trading and that he has not cheated. According to the jury, however, he disclosed the confidential information relating to Goldman Sachs Board to Raj Rajaratnam and therefore he did cheat.

Why did Rajat Gupta cheat? Nobel laureate, Gary Becker looks at cheating essentially as an economic issue. Becker considers humans as rational. A would-be cheat takes into account pay-off from cheating, probability of getting caught and severity of punishment.

Dan Ariely differs from Gary Becker and in his recent book titled "The (honest) Truth about Dishonesty", he refers to "Fudge Factor Theory". He argues, "Our behaviour is driven by two opposing motivations. On one hand, we want to view ourselves as honest (called 'ego motivation'). On the other hand, we want to benefit from cheating and get as much money as possible ('Financial motivation'). These two motivations are in conflict. Our amazing cognitive flexibility enables us to secure the benefits of cheating and at the same time view ourselves as honest, wonderful people!"

Ariely also quotes from Jerome K Jerome's novel 'Three men in a Boat' where the author takes a jibe at 'conscientious cheating'. "I knew a young man once, he was a most conscientious fellow and, when he took to fly-fishing, he determined never to exaggerate his hauls by more than 25% 'When I have caught 40 fish' said he, 'then I will tell people that I have caught 50. But I will not lie any more than that, because it is sinful to lie.' "

Cynics may say everyone cheats. Reward-risk equation may be different for different people. Trade-off between ego motivation and financial motivation is conditioned by one's values in life. Perhaps going scotfree on one occasion tempts a person to cheat again.

The Rajat Gupta phenomenon will puzzle and engage behavioural economists for months.

Rajat Gupta's remorseless regrets

Rajat Gupta who studied in IIT,Delhi and Harvard University and who headed McKinsey and was a Director in companies including P & G and Goldman Sachs has been sentenced to two years in jail and "impoverished" by $5 million fine. The punishment is much lighter than what the American law allows. The judge, Rakoff admitted to "wrestling with the 63-year old's extraordinary attributes and his disgusting conduct before handing down the sentence".

Gupta pleaded that he may be permitted to render social service in Rwanda and New York ghettos instead of being sent to the slammer. Many dignitaries including Bill Gates and Kofi Annan sought leniency from the judge in view of Gupta's unassailable contribution to society. Rakoff could not accept this argument fully because "while no defendant should be made a martyr to public passion, meaningful punishment is still necessary to reaffirm society's deep-seated need to see justice triumphant". The judge also rubbished the "Mother Theresa argument" (Gupta's social service merited his immunity from harsh punishment) and clarified, "It is unquestionable that Mr.Gupta is a good man. But the history of this country and the world is full of examples of good men who do bad things!"

Gupta's statement made in the court just before the sentencing was noteworthy for absence of 'mea culpa'. Gupta concluded his well-drafted statement saying, "As I come before you to be sentenced , the overwhelming feelings in my heart are acceptance of what has happened, of gratitude to my family, and friends, and of seeking forgiveness from them all. It is with these feelings that I hope to move forward and dedicate myself to the service of others." He did not seek forgiveness from those shareholders who lost money unjustly because of his indulgence / complicity in insider trading. Gupta continues to maintain his innocence.

Rakoff described Gupta's passing of insider information to Raj Rajaratnam as "disgusting in its implications" and a "terrible breach of trust". When Gupta's guilt is proved to the satisfaction of the jury and the judge and he refuses to own his culpability, fairness demands strict sentencing and not lenience. There is no place for inconsistency in delivery of justice. Judiciary is not a banana republic where the rich and the powerful and those with influential friends will be treated with velvet gloves.

Among the many reactions from Indian business people, Adi Godrej's was pejoratively notable. "I do not want to comment on individual case. However, I strongly feel that norms against insider trading in India are quite robust". What a revelation!

Kingfisher Airlines

Vijay Mallya's Kingfisher Airlines has the most employee-friendly terminal benefits scheme in the whole world. It has the policy of paying career-long salaries to employees only at the time of retirement. The only catch is that it does not allow its employees to quit.

The government was mindful of Vijay Mallya's munificence and therefore did not take any action for a long time. When the pilots and engineering staff went on strike demanding payment of salary, a minister sought an audience with Mallya. Being as responsible as ever, Mallyaji condescended to host a meeting. The minister was overwhelmed by Kingfisher's spirited hospitality and readily agreed that employees did not recognise their responsibility. The minister advised his secretary not to precipitate the issue by placing any note. So it became Government's policy not to 'interfere' in the affairs of a private airline.

Vijay Mallya (a polar opposite of his father, Vittal Mallya) is getting harassed by all and sundry. In addition to the employees' unreasonable demand for salary payment, the payees of cheques want encashment of their cheques! One creditor had the temerity to approach a court of law! The judge who perhaps was not aware of Mallya's legendary hospitality went to the ridiculous extent of ordering a warrant for arrest. Which policeman would be a fool to arrest him?

Finally, Vijay Mallya (as the name indicates, he always wins) decided enough was enough. He advised the Ministry of Civil Aviation why it was high time that his planes were grounded to teach the employees a lesson they would never forget. The minister knew that Mallya was infallible and then did the needful.

In the last eight months, the employees had written thousands of letters to Prime Minister seeking his intervention. The Prime Minister has advised his office to look into the matter and not to brief him on developments. PMO is expected to follow up within a year or two.

Pot and Kettle

Allegations of impropriety and additionally perhaps illegality against Nitin Gadkari are too serious to be ignored. He has disproved the hypothesis that the BJP is a party with a difference. The pot and the kettle (Congress and BJP) are blackening the entire country.

RSS has mud on its face. It was instrumental in imposing Gadkari's leadership on the party. As if two mistakes make a right, RSS was also keen to enable Gadkari be the party's president for a second term.

It is horrifying to note that Gadkari has not yet chosen to resign. It is praise-worthy that Ram Jethmalani has called a spade a spade and has advised his own party to behave ethically.

It is common in the US for a businessman to turn to politics for a short time and then to come back to business. In India, the political "rewards" are too attractive for a businessman to give up politics