Cuts in major projects: Is it new?

I recently had a casual talk with a construction company which has on-going projects all over India.  Fresh from a reading of open page in Hindu newspaper, which dealt with articles on corruption this week, in my talk with the representative of the company, out of curiosity I inquired about the amounts of money the contractors pay the public servants as cuts.  Though not unexpected, his revelation brought some clarity on the problem.

There are two aspects to the problem, one traditional, the other modern.  Traditionally, all construction companies of major infrastructure projects, across all the states of India, over the last many decades, have been paying percentages to the engineering personnel of the respective Governments.  The break-up when averaged across the States runs something like this: 0.3% to Junior Engineer, 0.25% to Deputy Executive Engineer, 0.2% to Executive Engineer, 0.1% to Superintendent Engineer, 0.1% to Chief Engineer.  Besides the engineering personnel, the treasury office takes 0.125%, the quality checking staff 0.1% and the Vigilance and monitoring staff 0.04%, totaling around 1.2% - 1.3% on an average.  It is said that these percentages are specific to the major infra projects and those for the minor infra projects are much higher.  Percentages when worked out in major projects will run into crores of rupees, hence in some states one or two months salary is paid traditionally to all the engineering personnel involved in the project every month, in place of the percentages.  However, of late the engineers have been demanding percentage based payments even in large infra projects.  The more the number of agencies involved in checking or monitoring the projects, the higher is the out go by way of cuts.  A classic case is that of third party quality control.  During earlier days, the quality control was conducted by the respective engineering departments, but now many State governments have been engaging private agencies to conduct third party QC.  The private employees of the third party QC agency also have got accustomed to this percentage system today.  The vigilance department too has its cut in every bill received by the company.  When asked what compels an honest and genuine contractor to pay the cuts, it was replied that even to complete the work in time, supervision of departmental staff is necessary on day to day basis.  If any company refuses to pay the cuts, the staff refuse to cooperate and work gets slowed down thereby resulting in huge payments for the idle men and machinery of the contractor.  Therefore, it makes practical sense for even the professional company to see that its expenditure on idle men and machinery, interest payments, arising out of delays in work dont exceed the cut payments to engineers.

 

The other problem, recent in origin, is that of payments to the elected heads of Governments while receiving large bill payments for the work done.  The increases in election expenditure has a role to play in this.  In the recent election to various states, it is learnt that some political parties paid up to Rs.2000 to each voter.  Any ambitious politician wanting to get reelected will necessarily have to mobilise resources during the time he is in office for the next election. When asked about the position in other countries, it is said that even in some developed nations, the contracting companies, through some way benefit the elected decision making head.  However, its hidden from public view, and doesnt affect either the lives of common man or the quality of the project.  

When I heard this, I didnt know whether I have to be happy because we are moving in the foot steps of advanced democracies where kick backs are confined to the top, or due to the fact that there is fair and equitable distribution of cuts even at the bottom. This problem is visible to public eye only because of the many poor quality projects being executed, non-commissioned projects, land being acquired unfairly for non-starter projects, active press and media.  Besides this, India is in a take-off stage today where a large number of mega-infra projects, each costing thousands of crores of rupees, are coming up.  Now, even the 1-2% in such projects will run into hundreds of crores, and in a country still suffering under the weight of the 60% poor and unstable families, cuts running into crores of rupees to its large number of lower-level officials is bound to attract public attention. 

What are we like- Milk, toddy or illicit arrack?

Recently I watched the telugu movie Broker, which is about a professional wheeler dealer who is capable of getting any type of work done in the Government.  The case of a very strict official, who doesnt bend even under the influence of the highest offer of money, is referred to this fellow.  He in turn gets into studying the mentality of the official and ultimately finds out that he has a weakness for a particular movie heroine.  Though the story is interesting I will stop at that.  I thought it interesting to classify the different species of public servants based on the degree of virtue the fellow holds in him.  Any public servant works in pursuit of either of the three objects, money, honour, or principles.  The extent to which these three objects exist in a person defines his degree of virtue.  The value of our public servants is defined by the degree of virtue the person holds in him.

A close look at the spectrum of public servants running our Government today reveals that they belong to different classes, each one at a different stage of evolution in terms of virtue, but all of the classes coexisting at the same time.  Based on the amount of virtue each class holds, we can classify the public servants into four broad categories, the honestly honest, the dishonestly honest, the honestly dishonest, and finally the dishonestly dishonest.

Man of Principles

The first class of honestly honest are the most virtuous of the spectrum, pure as unadulterated milk.  For the people belonging to this class, honesty and integrity extend beyond their job into their lives.  Sincerity in work, devotion to family, confining the life to his legitimate means of income, expenditure of excess time in noble pursuits of acquisition of true knowledge, faith in God, and above all, leading a life of simplicity and principles is his hallmark.  Impossible is to tempt a person belonging to this class of people, with the known temptations of either money/women/wine/food, or by temptations of honour and goodwill.  These people are willing to endure hardship because they are truly knowledgeable, and live by the universal principles of good.  Very rarely do we come across such public servants, but there is an urgent need to identify and preserve such creatures as role models for the present and future.  In the interest of governance they should be honoured ,and efforts made to replicate this fast dwindling species which is at the verge of extinction.  A conscious effort to cultivate the values of this species among others, from the current and future generations, needs to be done.   Principles are the fundamental good in their life.

Man of honour

Next class of servants are the dishonestly honest, similar to milk mixed with water.  Modernised urban society values money making and pleasure seeking behaviour, when compared with a traditional rural society which values virtue.  Dishonestly honest are the direct descendants of the milk class, some of whom mutate under the influence of modern pleasure seeking society.  Honour and money are the two factors which exert some influence on these persons.  A picture of perfect honesty is displayed to our eyes, which holds good as long as no opportunity for dishonesty presents itself.  Desire for honour compels the person to subdue his desire for money lest it should be out in the open.  We often listen to accusations of dishonesty against the corrupt persons from his mouth, partly motivated by pangs of jealousy that the corrupt person is enjoying a life of pleasure, and partly by his eagerness to prove his honesty in comparison with the corrupt fellow, thereby gaining some honour.   Presentation of any opportunity satisfying his desire for money without affecting his honour will not be lost by him; honour is the chief good in their lives. 

Man of money

The third class is the honestly dishonest ones, comparable to the pure, unadulterated toddy freshly tapped.  Though inherently not good, it has a value derived out of its purity.  A culture of bribe-taking, percentage-seeking behaviour has been well entrenched, in many of the offices of Government, over the last few decades.  New comers into the department are immediately given shelter, groomed in the code of dishonesty by the senior staff, and taught to deliver perfectly on receipt of the money.  Some years ago, when a friend went to a public office to request for the family pension and benefits of a dead acquaintance, he was confronted by a money-seeking clerk.  Being a religious chap, my friend counseled him for a few minutes as to how inhuman it is to demand money for sanctioning pension to the family of the deceased.  After a patient listening his answer was "all that I deal with are dead cases.  If I am compassionate, where will I get my money from?".  The result is, today we have a large number of government servants for whom taking money and delivering work is a way of life.  Non-delivery of the promised work, or demand of excess/less money than that agreed under the rate list of bribes is frowned upon, and termed unscrupulous.  We refer to these fellows as efficient but corrupt in common parlance.  There exists no desire for honour for this class of people because they imagine their honour to be derived from the money that is earned illegally.  These are the products of the modern pleasure seeking society, which has been successful in producing its own class of citizens.  Money is the fundamental good in these fellows lives.

Man of Pleasure

Finally we come to the dishonestly dishonest, the ones comparable to illicit arrack.  While they give an appearance of genuine dishonesty, they are in reality fake, whom we term as cheats.  These are the ones totally unscrupulous, always trying to swindle government moneys through forgery, fooling innocent visitors into paying sums without need, escaping the work assigned to them, always trying to steal both honour and money without any effort on their part.  Pleasures in life bought by money totally rule these chaps, and they are beyond correction.  Even by the standards of a modern society which values money, these fellows are useless and good for nothing.  Pleasure is the principal good in their lives.

Corruption: A symptom or disease?

Virtues like morality, honesty, courage, wisdom etc. are applied to an individual, whereas we always understand corruption in the context of the affairs of a State.  For corruption to exist we need a State or a society where some form of governance exists.  In the absence of Statehood the word corruption loses its meaning.  Therefore a Government is a necessary condition for existence of corruption.  Similarly we know that the same is true with justice as well; in the absence of a State justice doesn’t exist.  In a perfect State, like Rama Rajyam, justice is said to stand on four pillars.  Such a State will be devoid of corruption.  The introduction of certain amount of injustice into such a State cant be said to bring in corruption.  But once the injustice in a perfect State starts increasing there reaches a stage where something called corruption enters the scene.  It is therefore the withdrawal of justice from a State which brings in a variety of evils one of which is corruption.  Injustice is of many forms viz., immorality, inequality, dishonesty, lack of integrity etc.  Corruption is one such class of injustice where our guardians earn money in an unjust manner. 

We understand corruption to have taken place only when there is involvement of pecuniary gain to an official in the public sphere.  However there are a large number of unjust acts happening in day to day governance of the State which often go unnoticed.  Corruption is the end result of some of such unjust acts.  Let us take certain examples of unjust acts and examine if people call them corrupt practices (public official here includes elected representatives).

1. Demanding of money from a citizen by a public official for performing his duty.  This is bribe taking and hence corruption.

2. Public official uses his office for personal financial gain.  This is corruption.

3. The public official doesn’t demand money but accepts voluntary payment by a citizen for performance of duty.  This again amounts to bribe taking and hence is a corrupt practice.

4. Official accepts a voluntary payment for helping a citizen beyond his call of duty.  There is an act of voluntary help and voluntary payment- a just act and an unjust act.  However as an unjust act can never be a compensation for a just act, this should be treated as a corrupt act.

5. The father of an official was the subject of injustice at the hands of a Government official because of which he loses his life.  The son becomes a Government servant and resorts to illegal earning in order to take vengeance.  An unjust act can never be undone by another act of injustice.  Hence this amounts to corruption and cant be defended.

6. A public official uses undisclosed knowledge of the State (say the alignment of a ring road or setting up of an industry) in order to make legal investments and thereby makes legal money.  This isn’t regarded as corruption by many people.  However on further examination this is an act of stealing information of the State and encashing it- an unjust act viewed from any angle.

7. A rich public official used to moving in a BMW car privately, purchases the same vehicle for public use.  This is indiligent action which can be termed unjust.

8. A public official uses his office in order to help his relatives or friends earn money legally.  We cant call the official corrupt.  Is this an act of injustice?

9. A public official uses his office to help people belonging to his community earn money legally.  This isn’t a corrupt act.  Is this injustice?

10. Certain communities were historically subject to injustice under various forms of governance.  The current democratic regime has offered protection to such groups.  A public official, not necessarily belonging to these groups, uses his office to help persons from these groups gain benefits beyond that agreed under law, to the exclusion of deserving persons from other groups.  Is this an act of injustice?.

11. A public official at his discretion shows undue favour towards individuals belonging to certain class (say a community or region or language) to the exclusion of other equally deserving classes.  The official is not corrupt.  Is he unjust?

12. A public official decides on a policy action with the sole objective of earning votes.  Is this injustice?

13. Public Officials thrust their wrong opinions in making decisions out of intellectual arrogance; out of a feeling that what they know alone is right without following a process of consultation.  Is this injustice?

14. A public official allows unjust acts without pecuniary gain but in order to retain the job or assignment of his liking.  Is this injustice?

15. Doing an unjust act in order to undo historical injustice: An example is facilitation of occupation of private lands by those persons subject to injustice at some point in the past.  Is it a just act?

The three benefits: demolition of virtue in the rural folk:-  Government of Andhra Pradesh six years ago adopted a policy of saturation to all the eligible beneficiaries in the welfare schemes in the State.  Welfare pensions, housing and ration cards have therefore become within the reach of every rural household.  The policy is very virtuous, almost redefined the meaning of a virtuous policy.  For the first time a State  in India has done something for which the State came into existence on this planet viz., to take care of the basic needs (food, shelter and clothing) of its citizens.  The State has promised to provide food, shelter, and support to the old and infirm to all the eligible citizens.  This extremely virtuous policy-white as milk- had to be implemented through the dirty hands of our guardians.

Now as justice demands, this policy should have blessed all those eligible viz., those without a house, those newly wed without a card, and those old and infirm without a support.  We can see that the common factor in all these three classes of citizens is eligibility.  As usual the guardians from the cutting edge to the district level (sarpanch to the local public representatives to the officialdom) have taken note of the immense opportunities this virtuous policy has thrown.  The two mouth watering dishes any politician survives on, goodwill from the citizens and money for the self, presented themselves all of a sudden without asking.  The huge machinery of the guardiandom consisting of the public representatives and officials took the lead as usual in implementing the policy in right earnest.  The lead they took is two pronged, in one direction they taught the ineligible ones in the process of purchasing an eligibility, and in the other direction they trained the eligible ones that money alone can make their eligibility visible to the eye of the guardian.  Having thus succeeded in training their citizens they started the plunder of goodwill and money from this policy bowl.  The policy being virtuous, suffered silently at being contaminated by the dirty hands of our guardians.  Today we have citizens demanding benefits under this policy for the following reasons

1.      The eligible has not received the benefit despite payment of money

2.      The ineligible has not received the benefit despite payment of money

3.      The ineligible has not received the benefit despite the fact that a fellow ineligible has received.

4.      The really eligible and innocent has not received the benefit without any payment.

The beneficiaries from this are the public representatives- in goodwill and money, and officials-in  terms of money and postings.