The differences between the Planning Commission and the road transport ministry touched a new low today, with minister Kamal Nath terming the body as an armchair advisor.
Nath also questioned the quality of reports produced by the Plan panel saying: “You (Planning Commission) collect something from here, something from there and produce a book. It is all very well when you are an armchair advisor. Producing a book is one thing and producing a road is another thing. A book (report) should not only be well-bound, it should have content also.”
Sharing a dais with Planning Commission Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia at a conference on Public-Private Partnership (PPP), Nath went on to say that the panel is oblivious to the ground realities.
Nath said he was forewarned that the Plan panel would not allow him to achieve a 20 km-a-day road-building target.
The differences between the two dates back to the time of the Model Concession Agreement (MCA) — a document defining the procedure of awarding and implementing road projects.
“During the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, our issues were directly resolved by the Prime Minister’s Office without any interference from the planning commission,” said a senior National highways Authority of India (NHAI) official, who did not want to be identified.
More From This Section
During UPA-I, the planning commission took a lead and came up with MCA. “MCA has many clauses, which is difficult to practically implement. Issues like deciding the concession period on the basis of average traffic, which is again very difficult,” said the official.
“The panel is also dead against building roads with government money and prefers projects with private participation. But why should a road developer bid for a financially unviable road? This will lead to no road being built in under-developed areas,” the official said.
Nath also blamed the panel for delaying the completion of projects and said the new terminal at the Delhi airport could be built because the panel had nothing to do there.
“We were there (at the inauguration ceremony of Terminal 3) and I asked one of the people (I don't want to name) who were responsible for building this airport: How did you do it? Because the Planning Commission and their people had nothing to do with it,” Nath said.
A war of words followed between the minister and advisor to the deputy chairman, Gajendra Haldea. When Haldea contested Nath by saying “We were involved in the airport project”, Nath replied, “You were involved only in the beginning.” To this Haldea responded, “So ok, Mr Nath...You mean to say that the Planning Commission should be there at the start of the project and should leave after that.”
Ahluwalia, however, talking to reporters agreed that there were problems within the commission. “We are sorting them out,” he said.