Skip to playerSkip to main content
At Jaipur Literature Festival 2026, policy thinker Arun Maira and economist A.K. Bhattacharya examine India’s economic thinking, challenges, and future reforms in conversation with Mohit Satyanand, presented by Vedanta.

#JaipurLiteratureFestival2026 #JLF2026 #IndianEconomy #EconomicPolicy #IndiaGrowth #PublicPolicy #DevelopmentEconomics #EconomicReforms #Vedanta #IndiaDebate

~HT.178~

Category

🗞
News
Transcript
00:00Today was Army Day, so the inauguration began late.
00:08Arun, unfortunately, protocol has eaten a little bit into our time.
00:13So let me jump straight into it.
00:15You begin this book with a deep touch of empathy
00:18for the young people who knock at our doors, knock at our windows,
00:22and are unable to find jobs,
00:25despite all the promises of a rapidly growing nation.
00:28Now, you began your career in the Planning Commission in 2009
00:34with the mandate to improve employment and industry.
00:392014, we moved over to the NITI AYOG,
00:43and one of the biggest programs that was launched by the NITI AYOG
00:47was Make in India.
00:49So it's been 16, now 17 years,
00:51about talking about manufacturing and employment.
00:53I would go so far as to say that in terms of the structure of the nation,
00:59the structure of the economy, nothing has changed.
01:02What happened?
01:04Thank you so much, Mohit.
01:06You put a question to me about what has happened from 2009 onwards,
01:13but I want to step back.
01:14I was a child of India, born on the 15th of August, actually,
01:20four years before India became independent in 1947.
01:23At that time in 1947, we made a vow, a tryst with destiny,
01:31a very famous speech of our Prime Minister,
01:34which still rings in my ears,
01:36where he said that India has woken up,
01:38and we promised ourselves two things.
01:41One is, we would never be bullied
01:43by a large industrial foreign country again.
01:48We would build our own industries,
01:51we would become self-reliant
01:53and proud of our own capabilities
01:55and not talked down to by other countries
01:59who felt they were more advanced than we were.
02:03One.
02:04Number two, the tryst with destiny was,
02:06in Mahatma Gandhi's phrase,
02:08well,
02:09Poorna Suvaraj.
02:11Equal opportunities, equal freedoms
02:14for all Indian citizens,
02:16men, women, Hindus, Muslims,
02:19whatever languages they spoke,
02:22equal freedoms politically,
02:23which we got perhaps by a universal franchise,
02:27and equal freedoms also socially,
02:31which we still haven't got.
02:33The caste system is pernicious still,
02:35and equal freedoms economically.
02:39It means equal opportunities to learn and earn,
02:41and which is the point that you come to.
02:44And here we are,
02:45we took off that journey,
02:46and I grew up in that India.
02:48And I landed in the Planning Commission in 2009 only,
02:51but before that, Mohit,
02:53I did work with the Tata Group,
02:55and the Tata Group
02:56had always been building Indian industry
03:00and helping Indians to learn how to do things,
03:04industrial things,
03:05as well as anyone else in the world,
03:08even during the dark days,
03:10when the British were ruling our country.
03:14What happened after that,
03:15we embarked on that journey to build our own industries in India,
03:19and I must say,
03:21by 2000 and,
03:23not 2000 even,
03:24excuse me,
03:25by 1989,
03:26when I broke off from Tata's
03:28to go on a sabbatical to the United States,
03:30for some personal reasons,
03:33we had in India,
03:34my organization,
03:35Tata's,
03:35been building in India,
03:37trucks and buses,
03:39designed by Indians,
03:40made by Indians,
03:42exported from India
03:43to 50 countries around the world
03:45before 1991.
03:47In competition with the Japanese,
03:49the Germans,
03:49the Americans,
03:50and the British,
03:51and we did quite well.
03:52Not at the lowest prices also,
03:54by the way,
03:55at higher prices than the Japanese.
03:57We could do it.
03:59We could do it.
04:01China at that time,
04:02and I want to bring in China into the picture,
04:05China at that time did not have,
04:06as high quality industrial enterprises
04:09as we had built.
04:11Few we had,
04:13but China had none of that quality at that time.
04:16So, industrially,
04:17China and India were,
04:18you may say,
04:19comparable in some ways.
04:21In terms of poverty,
04:22which is the story
04:23that I want to just focus on,
04:26before 1947,
04:28India was a very,
04:29very poor country.
04:32Capabilities had been denuded by the British.
04:34We were prevented from building our own industries.
04:38We had to import and buy industrial goods made by Britain.
04:42Indian people were being exported by the British as labour
04:46on industrial plantations in Malaysia,
04:49Mauritius, Caribbean.
04:51This is what India was being used for
04:54by our colonial masters.
04:57After 1947,
04:59poverty did reduce in India.
05:01It did.
05:03And it was reducing,
05:04and so was it in China,
05:06which also broke up in the 1940s after the war.
05:10It was reducing there.
05:11But in 1989,
05:13the numbers I have,
05:15China was a bit poorer than India,
05:19per capita incomes,
05:20and the GDP was comparable.
05:23Then I forced forward to 2009.
05:25I'm invited by the Prime Minister
05:27to join the Planning Commission
05:29with these two questions.
05:31He said,
05:31what happened?
05:32We were growing as well as China,
05:35reducing poverty also,
05:37and creating employment as well as China was.
05:39And here we are,
05:41then in 2009.
05:43Yes,
05:44we have reduced poverty
05:45even further up to 1991.
05:49But look what China has achieved.
05:51And in terms of industry,
05:53look where China is.
05:55They were producing,
05:56by that time already in 2009,
06:00electronic hardware
06:01and telecom equipment,
06:02which we were importing
06:03from then even then.
06:06And many other industrial goods,
06:07machinery,
06:08they were selling
06:09not just to us
06:10but around the world.
06:11And today,
06:11if you fast forward,
06:13look where China has reached.
06:14And we are still,
06:15as you point out,
06:16at a place
06:17where we are now
06:18dependent on China
06:19for industrial goods
06:22as also is the US.
06:23And the Prime Minister asked,
06:25who is a very good man,
06:25I said,
06:26sir,
06:26I don't know economics.
06:28He said,
06:28that is why
06:29I have you in the Planning Commission.
06:30There's something
06:31about the framework
06:32of economics.
06:32which the Indian economists,
06:35including myself,
06:36he said,
06:36very humbly,
06:37are wedded to.
06:38I can't get out of it.
06:39I'm in it.
06:40You can from outside say,
06:42what is it about
06:43the way we think
06:44about an economy,
06:47about a nation
06:48that is preventing us
06:49from achieving
06:50what we could have,
06:51should have,
06:52and which China has achieved?
06:54And I could tell you
06:55what the answers
06:56to the questions are.
06:57Yeah, well,
06:58I think it's a good time
06:59to ask Vidya
07:00what she thinks.
07:01You've also tracked
07:02this journey
07:02between a time
07:05in the early 80s
07:06when China set on
07:07its path for reform
07:08and are now
07:09five times ahead of us
07:10not to put too fine
07:12a number of it.
07:12What do you think
07:13China did
07:14which India was not able to do?
07:21So before that,
07:22what I want to say
07:23is we club India
07:24as a country
07:26and we say that
07:27nothing has changed
07:28and it is same
07:2915-17% of GDP
07:31comes from manufacturing.
07:33But if we see
07:33at sub-national level,
07:35there are states in India
07:36which are like mini-China.
07:38So if you see
07:39on a per-person basis
07:40purchasing power parity,
07:42there is Tamil Nadu,
07:43there is Gujarat
07:44who is at the same level
07:45of PPP per capita income
07:47as China.
07:48So it is not
07:49that we have not moved
07:50but manufacturing
07:51has remained concentrated
07:52in just four or five states
07:54which are something
07:55like 60 plus percent
07:57of India's total manufacturing
07:58and the manufacturing
07:59needs to scale up
08:01and move up north
08:02because that's where
08:03majority of the jobs
08:04are required
08:05in manufacturing,
08:06especially low-skilled manufacturing
08:08and that is what India has failed.
08:10How to transmit,
08:11how to scale up,
08:13that is where we failed.
08:14Not that we have not done anywhere.
08:16It's how to do another Jamshedpur.
08:18You know,
08:19that's the thing,
08:19how to scale up
08:20to Tata's level
08:21because even if I see
08:22in Tamil Nadu now
08:23where I stay
08:23for past 10 years,
08:25local youth
08:26has got highly educated,
08:28right?
08:28So 50-60 percent
08:29of people have degrees,
08:30young adults have degrees.
08:32They do not want
08:33to work in low-skilled
08:33manufacturing.
08:34That's why,
08:35you know,
08:35the state is going
08:36after electronics,
08:37you know,
08:37Apple,
08:38then it becomes
08:39a status symbol.
08:40I'm working for Apple.
08:41You know,
08:41no longer I'm a,
08:42you know,
08:42you have to say
08:42that I'm on the factory floor.
08:44So it is the distribution
08:45of manufacturing
08:46that is what
08:47we should be worried about
08:48and why the states
08:49where manufacturing
08:49is required
08:50has not grown
08:51and we know that.
08:52Second thing is
08:53we must accept somewhere
08:54that if we are not able
08:56to export enough,
08:58manufacturing to GDP
08:59in India
08:59will almost never rise
09:01above 20 percent.
09:04Why is that?
09:04And China exactly
09:05is the exposed story
09:06of manufacturing
09:06and why is that?
09:08Because if we think
09:09about ourselves,
09:10we never spend
09:10more than 20 percent
09:11of our income
09:12on manufacturing goods.
09:14So if we don't spend
09:15more than 20 percent
09:15of income
09:16on manufacturing
09:16in locally,
09:18only that much
09:18only can get produced.
09:20Rest of it
09:20has to be exported.
09:22And so then
09:22we have to think
09:23about why refined
09:24petroleum,
09:25which is very
09:26capital intensive,
09:27we have no raw material,
09:28labor share of income,
09:30you know,
09:30value added in refined
09:31petroleum is only
09:32less than 10 percent.
09:33Why refined petroleum
09:34ended as India's
09:35largest goods export
09:36for so many years?
09:37Right?
09:38So we know the story,
09:39we can get into it
09:40some other time.
09:41So why labor intensive
09:42manufacturing has failed
09:44in north of India
09:45is the key thing
09:45that we need to look at.
09:47Thanks so much.
09:48Vidya,
09:48I want you to just
09:49put one number
09:50on this factory
09:52north-south divide,
09:54which is that
09:54in Tamil Nadu,
09:55I ran the numbers,
09:56you have about
09:57500 factories
09:58per 1 million people.
10:00In Bihar,
10:01can anybody guess
10:02the number?
10:0522.
10:07522.
10:08That's the extent
10:09of the north-south divide.
10:10But AKB,
10:11I still call you AKB.
10:13What is your take
10:15on the China-India
10:16K-shaped development?
10:19Yeah,
10:19thank you for
10:20this discussion.
10:22And I have
10:24a brief response
10:25to this specific
10:26question of yours.
10:28I think number one,
10:30the share of
10:33employment in agriculture
10:35continues to rise
10:37in this country.
10:38although its share
10:40in total GDP
10:41is declining.
10:42So what we are seeing
10:43is an agriculture sector
10:45with 48%
10:47of its workforce
10:47in agriculture
10:48and producing
10:50only 16%
10:51of the economy.
10:52And it is actually
10:53declining.
10:54So essentially,
10:55unproductive
10:56and over-dependence
10:58on agriculture
10:59and our economic policies
11:01with the last
11:02several decades
11:03have failed
11:04to take
11:05that workforce
11:06away
11:07from agriculture
11:08and whatever
11:10we have been able
11:10to do,
11:12can you believe it
11:13that 90%
11:15of our workforce
11:16is still in the
11:17unorganized sector?
11:18Now why
11:19is these two
11:20big things
11:20that have happened?
11:22One
11:22is
11:23that 90%
11:25of unorganized
11:26sector employees
11:27and 48%
11:28of total workforce
11:29in agriculture.
11:31I think
11:32we have failed
11:33to focus
11:35adequately
11:36on primary
11:37and secondary
11:38education.
11:39We have failed
11:40to focus
11:40adequately
11:41on skilling
11:42and reskilling.
11:43and I dare
11:45say
11:45that we have
11:46also failed
11:47to look
11:48at two
11:48other social
11:49infrastructure
11:50which is
11:51healthcare
11:51and water.
11:54And if I may
11:55add
11:55with that
11:56is a looming
11:57challenge
11:58of climate.
11:59Now in all
12:00these areas
12:00if only we
12:02had focused
12:02on making
12:03sure
12:04that our
12:04agriculture
12:05became more
12:06productive
12:06if we had
12:07managed
12:07to skill
12:08those
12:09agricultural
12:10employees
12:10and take
12:11them away
12:12from there
12:12and put
12:13them in
12:14productive
12:14jobs
12:15in the
12:15secondary
12:16sector
12:16which is
12:17the
12:17industry
12:17or even
12:19even if
12:20the tertiary
12:20sector
12:21which is
12:21the services
12:21sector
12:22where we
12:22redeployed
12:23them
12:23they are
12:24into
12:25by and
12:26large
12:26if you
12:26look at
12:26the skill
12:27levels
12:27it is a
12:28very very
12:28ordinary
12:29and basic
12:30level.
12:30So I
12:30think
12:31why we
12:32did not
12:32do well
12:33as well
12:33in China
12:34I think
12:35essentially
12:35lies
12:36in our
12:36basic
12:37policy
12:37on why
12:38we did
12:39not do
12:39enough
12:40on primary
12:41and secondary
12:42education
12:42we focused
12:43a lot
12:43on the
12:44higher
12:45education
12:45and we
12:46did exceedingly
12:46well
12:47but that
12:47higher
12:48education
12:48product
12:49have
12:49actually
12:49as
12:50somebody
12:51said
12:51that
12:52they are
12:52leaving
12:52India
12:53they are
12:53going
12:53out
12:53so there
12:54is a
12:54migration
12:55that is
12:55happening
12:55so whatever
12:56you have
12:56produced
12:56on the
12:57higher
12:57education
12:57the
12:58IITs
12:58and the
12:59IAMs
12:59they are
12:59all sitting
13:00abroad
13:00and they
13:01are occasionally
13:01coming to
13:01India
13:02things like
13:03Yairpur
13:03Literature
13:03Festival
13:04so that's
13:05the problem
13:06we have
13:06not focused
13:07on the
13:07primary
13:08requirement
13:08which is
13:09primary
13:09education
13:10secondary
13:10education
13:12that's the
13:13real difference
13:14between
13:14China and
13:15India
13:15Vidya
13:16I wanted
13:17to say
13:17something
13:18so I
13:20just wanted
13:21to say
13:21from our
13:22recent work
13:23though
13:24you know
13:25agriculture
13:25share in
13:25employment
13:26overall
13:26remains high
13:27if we
13:28see young
13:28adults
13:29which is
13:29people in
13:3020s
13:3020 to
13:3129
13:31less than
13:3215%
13:33work on
13:33farms
13:34and in
13:34several
13:35states
13:35it's even
13:36less than
13:3610%
13:37so young
13:38people
13:38really
13:39are not
13:40on farms
13:41in fact
13:41in many
13:41areas
13:42farm
13:42wages
13:43are higher
13:43than
13:43non-farm
13:44wages
13:44in rural
13:45area
13:45but they
13:46may re-enter
13:47you are
13:47right sir
13:48they re-enter
13:49even women
13:49have re-entered
13:50into you know
13:51farming after
13:52the age of
13:5230-35
13:53because there is a
13:54distress on
13:55household income
13:56but actual
13:57structural transformation
13:58in terms of
13:59young people
13:59has happened
14:00but if we
14:01don't generate
14:02non-farm jobs
14:02then people
14:03eventually go back
14:04especially women
14:05you know
14:05end up going
14:06after COVID
14:07they end up
14:08going back
14:09but on
14:09the same note
14:10for example
14:11if we compare
14:11I know
14:13from West
14:13Bengal
14:14West Bengal
14:17was more
14:17prosperous
14:18purpose and
14:19basis
14:19relative to
14:20Tamil Nadu
14:21in 1980s
14:22that is not
14:22that long ago
14:23right
14:24and so West
14:25Bengal could
14:25have been
14:26Tamil Nadu
14:26but Tamil Nadu's
14:27per capita income
14:28is now five
14:28times West
14:29Bengal
14:29and I
14:31think
14:31you know
14:32we know
14:33like you asked
14:34why China
14:34we know
14:35the importance
14:36of law
14:36and order
14:37we know
14:37the importance
14:38of policy
14:39certainty
14:39you know
14:40we know
14:41the importance
14:41of land
14:42acquisition
14:42and all that
14:43so yeah
14:44also the China
14:45what they did
14:46one thing
14:47which we may
14:48not know
14:48is local
14:49governments
14:49were very
14:50highly empowered
14:51right
14:51so the local
14:52governments
14:52city governments
14:53you know
14:54provinces government
14:55they could raise
14:56their own revenue
14:57and that's why
14:58there was a
14:58competition
14:58between the
14:59provinces
14:59to get
15:00but here
15:01our model
15:01is lot of
15:02it is on
15:02central transfers
15:04you know
15:04at the state
15:05level
15:05and the city
15:05level
15:06it is even
15:06worse
15:07so you know
15:08most of our
15:09living standard
15:12or how we feel
15:12about life
15:13depends on our
15:14day to day
15:14experiences
15:15so you know
15:17something like
15:1710,000 people
15:18taking a train
15:19once long
15:19distance
15:20that is different
15:21from thousand
15:22people taking
15:22you know
15:23same train
15:24or transport
15:24locally
15:25you know
15:25200 times
15:26a year
15:27right
15:28so that welfare
15:28impact is much
15:29later
15:30so local
15:30infrastructure
15:31becomes much
15:32more important
15:32for how city
15:33functions
15:33and so on
15:34so that's
15:35why we need
15:35I feel
15:36much more
15:36you know
15:37emphasize
15:37housing
15:38we are building
15:39one reason
15:40it will become
15:41even more
15:41important
15:42to integrate
15:43the fragmented
15:44agriculture land
15:45in India
15:46because now
15:47we have a policy
15:47whereby
15:48we are giving
15:48subsidy
15:49to build
15:50houses
15:50in rural
15:52areas
15:52right
15:53that's where
15:53we don't have
15:54jobs
15:55we need affordable
15:55housing in urban
15:56areas
15:57right
15:57so the migration
15:58happens to urban
15:59areas
15:59but there is
16:00almost no
16:00affordable housing
16:01for migrant
16:02families
16:02and we do
16:03work with them
16:03there is no
16:04housing
16:05so family
16:05stays back
16:06in the rural
16:06area
16:07where now
16:07the house
16:08is already
16:08built
16:08with the
16:09state subsidy
16:10with the
16:10central subsidy
16:11right
16:11which they
16:12cannot rent
16:12out
16:13so family
16:13is there
16:14and you
16:15know
16:15the man
16:15migrates
16:16and man
16:16is this
16:17side
16:17so we
16:18have to
16:18shift the
16:19focus
16:19you know
16:19housing
16:20in terms
16:20of urban
16:21affordable
16:22housing
16:22much more
16:23than building
16:23housing stock
16:24where you
16:25know jobs
16:25are not
16:26there
16:26so maybe
16:26these are
16:27some of
16:27the
16:27policies
16:28yeah
16:29exactly
16:30you know
16:32we came to
16:33local governance
16:34came to
16:35housing
16:35came to
16:36public
16:37transportation
16:37these are
16:39the usual
16:39debates we've
16:40been having
16:40when I was
16:41in planning
16:41commission
16:41I was also
16:42responsible for
16:43urbanization
16:44and I could
16:45see even in
16:45urbanization
16:46the philosophy
16:48was that
16:49build those
16:50cities
16:50put more
16:51money into
16:52Bombay
16:52because that
16:53time
16:54presently
16:54Bombay was
16:55contributing
16:56per capita
16:57and per
16:57unit of
16:58land
16:58much more
16:59to GDP
17:00than a
17:00city in
17:00Bihar
17:01so we
17:01were
17:01diverting
17:02our
17:02resources
17:03to success
17:04so where
17:04there's
17:04success
17:05put more
17:06money behind
17:06it
17:06we
17:07this was
17:08a new
17:08thing
17:08before
17:091990s
17:10the philosophy
17:11was backward
17:12areas
17:12and that's
17:13right the
17:13Tata
17:14factories
17:14HESC
17:15many came
17:15in those
17:16back
17:16there would
17:16have been
17:17big industries
17:18in those
17:19areas
17:19but we
17:20shifted
17:20we said
17:21firstly
17:21public sector
17:22is a bad
17:23idea
17:23now when
17:24you're going
17:24to poorer
17:25states
17:26and as
17:27you said
17:27the private
17:28sector won't
17:28go until
17:29it's easy
17:30for them
17:31to go
17:31the public
17:31sector is
17:32forced to
17:32go
17:32and if
17:33we then
17:33change our
17:34minds
17:34after 1991
17:35and said
17:36the public
17:37sector is
17:37bad in
17:37education
17:38in health
17:39in industry
17:40let's
17:40privatize
17:41everything
17:42you cannot
17:43build
17:44social services
17:45and institutions
17:46which are
17:47serving a
17:47social purpose
17:49privately
17:50so let me
17:51say I want
17:52to just point
17:53out I'm not
17:54an economist
17:54and therefore
17:55I'm still
17:55hearing from
17:56the economist
17:57perspective
17:57the arguments
17:58what is
17:59competition
18:00and how is
18:01competition
18:02abilities built
18:03competitive ability
18:05you learn it
18:06it's not an
18:07endowment
18:07it's a natural
18:08endowment
18:08so in the
18:09theory of trade
18:10Ricardo's
18:11theory of trade
18:12if you have a
18:13natural endowment
18:14like Portugal
18:15and you have
18:16good sun
18:17and soil
18:17grow wine
18:18and export your
18:20wine all over the
18:20world
18:21and please
18:22there's a
18:22British saying
18:22it
18:23we have this
18:24endowment of
18:25industrial capability
18:26buy our
18:27industrial goods
18:28but did the
18:28British have
18:29industrial capabilities
18:30and endowment
18:31100 years before
18:32no
18:32they learnt it
18:34nations
18:36and people
18:37and enterprises
18:38we learn
18:39capabilities
18:40so if you look
18:40at the progress
18:41of development
18:42of any country
18:43it's a history
18:44of how they
18:44learned to do
18:45things that they
18:46could not do
18:46before
18:47and those
18:48countries that
18:48learn faster
18:49than others
18:50acquire competitive
18:51abilities that they
18:52did not have
18:53before
18:53this is China's
18:54story
18:54China is a much
18:56faster learner
18:57than India
18:58has been
18:59particularly I'm
19:00saying after
19:011991
19:01when we changed
19:02our philosophy
19:03or economics
19:04to say
19:05you know
19:05just do the
19:06things that
19:07you can naturally
19:08do and import
19:08the rest
19:09build your trade
19:10but don't build
19:11your industry
19:12and
19:13here
19:14in the competitive
19:15advantages
19:15if you have in a
19:16competitive world
19:17where you don't
19:18have all the
19:18endowments
19:19you must build
19:20your technologies
19:21your competitive
19:22advantage
19:23on the resources
19:24that you have
19:25much more of
19:26and therefore
19:26the Middle Eastern
19:27countries
19:28Saudi Arabia
19:29and around them
19:30they've built
19:31very good industries
19:32and very good
19:33economies
19:34based on the
19:36use of oil
19:37okay
19:38but we
19:39what do we have
19:40more of than
19:40every other country
19:41human beings
19:42and our models
19:43of production
19:44in the private sector
19:45are the
19:46productivities
19:47defined by
19:48how few people
19:49you employ
19:50I'm saying
19:51please
19:51like the
19:52Japanese did
19:53after the war
19:54and the
19:54Chinese have
19:54done
19:55you must
19:56have small
19:57industries
19:57which employ
19:58more people
19:59and less
19:59capital
19:59we are not
20:00endowed
20:00with capital
20:01we are
20:02endowed
20:03by God's
20:03grace
20:04more human
20:04beings
20:05than elsewhere
20:05and Vidya
20:06it's not
20:07necessary
20:08that Bihar
20:10have the same
20:11pattern of
20:11industrialization
20:12in the United
20:14States
20:14do you think
20:15Kansas has
20:16the same
20:17number of
20:17California
20:18big industries
20:18and Illinois
20:19no
20:20there are
20:21natural
20:21endowment
20:22advantages
20:23and you
20:24build
20:24clusters of
20:25competence
20:26in different
20:26parts
20:27so Bihar
20:28should not
20:28be like
20:29Tamil Nadu
20:29I'm not
20:31saying Bihar
20:32should have
20:32same
20:33manufacturing
20:33as Tamil Nadu
20:34at all
20:34means Bihar
20:35should go
20:35by its own
20:36advantage
20:37and own
20:37comparative
20:37advantage
20:38but just
20:39that Bihar
20:39and UP
20:40should have
20:40more manufacturing
20:41that's about
20:42it
20:43or if not
20:43manufacturing
20:44wherever they
20:45have advantage
20:45it can be
20:46crafts
20:46it can be
20:47festivals
20:48it can be
20:48many other
20:49things
20:49I want to
20:51take you up
20:51on one
20:52particular phrase
20:53that you
20:53used
20:54which is
20:54about
20:54privatizing
20:56there's not
20:56been much
20:57privatizing
20:57of the public
20:58sector in
20:59India
20:59I want to
20:59push back
21:00on that
21:00what we
21:02have seen
21:02what we
21:03did see
21:03prior to
21:04Indira Gandhi's
21:05time
21:06we saw
21:06the opposite
21:06Mohit
21:07I have to
21:08just interrupt
21:08you
21:09because you
21:09see
21:09we have to
21:10save time
21:11if I hear
21:11you talking
21:12the same
21:13old way
21:13with the
21:13same way
21:14of thinking
21:14I must
21:15interrupt
21:15you
21:15we have
21:16not got
21:16as much
21:17privatization
21:18as we
21:18should have
21:18had
21:181991
21:19we wanted
21:20to privatize
21:20I want to
21:21say to you
21:22since I was
21:22comparing with
21:23China
21:23they've achieved
21:24something which
21:24we haven't
21:25did they
21:26privatize their
21:26financial sector
21:27like we
21:28are attempting
21:29to do
21:29even today
21:30they don't
21:30and the
21:32US kept
21:32blaming China
21:33to say
21:34oh
21:34you cheated
21:35you kept
21:36your public
21:36sector
21:37undertaking
21:37so large
21:38and the
21:39story is
21:39this Mohit
21:40that in
21:401991
21:41we became
21:43intellectual
21:44slaves of
21:45American
21:45economics
21:46there
21:47because IMF
21:48here to
21:49take the
21:49loan
21:49thereafter
21:50our
21:50economic
21:50policies
21:51have been
21:52taught to
21:52us from
21:53American
21:54academic
21:55institutions
21:56Indians
21:56who are
21:57professors
21:57there
21:58have become
21:58our
21:58economic
21:59advisors
21:59China
22:00did not
22:02China
22:04did not
22:05I will
22:08tell you
22:09I will
22:09just
22:09touch upon
22:10two
22:10issues
22:11one was
22:11the
22:11privatization
22:12other is
22:13the
22:13elephant in
22:14the room
22:15which is
22:15the governance
22:16structure
22:16I don't
22:18think we
22:18have
22:18reformed
22:19the
22:19governance
22:20structure
22:20in this
22:20country
22:21in spite
22:21of many
22:22many
22:22laudable
22:23legislative
22:24initiatives
22:24we talked
22:25about the
22:26third year
22:26of governance
22:27I think
22:27our third
22:28year governance
22:28is a joke
22:29and whether
22:31it is the
22:31steel frame
22:32or the
22:32civil service
22:33whoever has
22:34sort of
22:35you know
22:35clustered
22:37it in a
22:37certain way
22:38and kept
22:39its ability
22:40to function
22:41as freely
22:41as efficiently
22:43and effectively
22:43as possible
22:44is a matter
22:45of bigger
22:46debate
22:46but I think
22:47it is time
22:48that we
22:49need to
22:50focus
22:50on what
22:52really happens
22:53at the
22:53third year
22:54of governance
22:54instead of
22:55what really
22:56happens
22:56in New
22:57Delhi
22:57and unless
22:59we change
23:00that focus
23:00from New
23:01Delhi
23:01to towns
23:03the third
23:04tiered
23:04towns
23:04two tier
23:05towns
23:05I don't
23:06think
23:07we will
23:07be able
23:08to change
23:09the way
23:10we are
23:10reimagining
23:11India
23:12that's number
23:12one
23:12number two
23:13a quick
23:14short point
23:14is about
23:15privatization
23:16yes of course
23:17I entirely
23:17agree with
23:18you that
23:18we should
23:19not have
23:19borrowed
23:20madly
23:21and blindly
23:22about this
23:22privatization
23:23model
23:24but what
23:24China did
23:25was they
23:26did not
23:26privatize
23:27but they
23:28made that
23:29public state
23:29owned sector
23:30more effective
23:31and more
23:31efficient
23:32and more
23:33you know
23:34addressing
23:35and responding
23:37to the
23:37market
23:38principles
23:38they did
23:39not
23:39compromise
23:40on that
23:40what we
23:41did was
23:42we kept
23:42our public
23:43sector
23:44a kind
23:45of
23:46a prisoner
23:47of the
23:48political
23:48class
23:48and I
23:49don't think
23:49it is a
23:50good thing
23:50and even
23:51when we
23:51do privatize
23:52now
23:52we are
23:53using it
23:54only for
23:55a fiscal
23:55purpose
23:56of meeting
23:57your fiscal
23:57deficit
23:58which is
23:59something
23:59that you
24:00want to
24:00spend
24:00without
24:01earning
24:01the
24:02revenue
24:02so I
24:03think
24:03our
24:03privatization
24:04whatever
24:04little
24:05has
24:05happened
24:05is
24:06purely
24:06guided
24:07not
24:07by
24:07reform
24:08but
24:08by
24:09meeting
24:09your
24:10fiscal
24:10requirements
24:10so I
24:11think
24:11both
24:11the
24:11governance
24:12front
24:12as well
24:13as
24:13the
24:13privatization
24:14front
24:14we
24:14have
24:15left
24:15a lot
24:16to be
24:16desired
24:16in fact
24:18Arun
24:18when we
24:19were talking
24:19earlier
24:19you said
24:20and I
24:21think
24:21this is
24:21very
24:22noteworthy
24:23that
24:23actually
24:24despite
24:24being a
24:25socialist
24:25nation
24:26in
24:27many
24:27ways
24:28in
24:28terms
24:28of
24:28governance
24:28China
24:29is
24:29a lot
24:30more
24:30democratic
24:30than
24:31India
24:31do you
24:31want to
24:32expand
24:32on that
24:32yes
24:33what is
24:35democracy
24:36democracy
24:36is
24:37governance
24:37of the
24:39people
24:39for the
24:40people
24:41and
24:41by
24:42the
24:42people
24:42okay
24:43of the
24:43people
24:44means
24:44you
24:44form
24:44your
24:44government
24:45of
24:45your
24:46own
24:46people
24:46and
24:46not
24:47some
24:47foreign
24:47people
24:47yes
24:48and
24:48you
24:48can
24:48select
24:49them
24:49in
24:49different
24:50ways
24:50elections
24:51or
24:51whatever
24:52they
24:52emerge
24:52it's
24:53a
24:53government
24:53of
24:54your
24:54people
24:54and
24:55must
24:56always
24:56at the
24:56point
24:56of
24:57government
24:57be
24:57for
24:57the
24:57people
24:58not
24:58for
24:58private
24:59individuals
25:00or
25:00for
25:00the
25:00private
25:00sector
25:01it's
25:01for
25:01the
25:02poorer
25:02citizens
25:02it is
25:03for
25:03those
25:03who
25:03don't
25:04have
25:04the
25:04power
25:04who
25:04don't
25:05have
25:05the
25:05resources
25:05that's
25:06the
25:06purpose
25:06of
25:06government
25:07okay
25:08so it
25:08has to
25:09be
25:09for
25:09the
25:09people
25:09but
25:10in
25:10real
25:10democracy
25:11it
25:12is
25:12also
25:12government
25:13by
25:13the
25:14people
25:14that
25:14means
25:14locally
25:15the
25:16people
25:16must
25:16be
25:17participating
25:18in
25:18the
25:18decisions
25:19about
25:19what
25:19infrastructure
25:20is being
25:20built
25:21who
25:22gets
25:22the
25:22priority
25:22this
25:23okay
25:24and
25:25this
25:25is
25:25where
25:25China
25:26has
25:26been
25:26very
25:27very
25:27good
25:27China
25:29is
25:29highly
25:29democratic
25:30why
25:30because
25:31the
25:31communist
25:32party
25:32a single
25:33party
25:33knows
25:34that
25:34if
25:35the
25:35people
25:35are
25:35unhappy
25:36on the
25:36ground
25:36there
25:37will
25:37be
25:37a
25:37revolution
25:38so
25:38the
25:38people
25:39of
25:39China
25:39today
25:40are
25:40so
25:40happy
25:41with
25:41China
25:41the
25:41younger
25:42people
25:42in
25:43the
25:43latest
25:43few
25:44surveys
25:44they
25:45say
25:45they're
25:46much
25:46happier
25:47with
25:47China's
25:47form of
25:48governance
25:48and
25:48Chinese
25:49have
25:50been
25:50to
25:50the
25:50US
25:50than
25:51the
25:51US
25:51and
25:51of
25:51course
25:52young
25:52people
25:52in
25:52the
25:52US
25:52are
25:53not
25:53happy
25:53about
25:54the
25:54US
25:54form
25:54of
25:54governance
25:55and
25:55what
25:55is
25:55it
25:56about
25:56the
25:56Chinese
25:56form
25:56of
25:56government
25:57I said
25:57this
25:57that
25:58they
25:58build up
25:59their
25:59carders
26:00from
26:00the
26:00bottom
26:01the
26:01people
26:01who
26:02rise
26:02up
26:02in
26:02that
26:02party
26:03are
26:03people
26:03who
26:03have
26:03demonstrated
26:04that
26:05on
26:05the
26:05ground
26:05they're
26:06able
26:06to
26:06carry
26:07the
26:07people
26:07and
26:08to
26:08support
26:08the
26:08party
26:09the
26:09party
26:10is
26:10working
26:10for
26:10you
26:11we
26:11bring
26:11our
26:12authority
26:12but
26:13what
26:13do
26:13you
26:14want
26:14and
26:14we
26:14make
26:14it
26:15happen
26:15the
26:15Chinese
26:16politician
26:16is
26:17very
26:17good
26:17at
26:17the
26:18politics
26:18of
26:18implementation
26:19our
26:20politicians
26:20are
26:20very
26:21good
26:21at
26:21the
26:21politics
26:21of
26:21elections
26:22well
26:23said
26:24we
26:25talked
26:25a little
26:26bit
26:26about
26:26law
26:27and
26:27order
26:27you
26:27talked
26:27about
26:28law
26:28and
26:28order
26:28I
26:29think
26:30we
26:30need
26:30to
26:30expand
26:30on
26:30this
26:31a
26:31little
26:31bit
26:31more
26:31when
26:32I
26:33toured
26:33Bihar
26:34a couple
26:34of
26:34years
26:34ago
26:35and
26:36asked
26:37this
26:37question
26:38why
26:38there
26:38are
26:38so
26:39few
26:39factories
26:39in
26:40Bihar
26:40and
26:41the
26:41uniform
26:42answer
26:42I
26:42got
26:43was
26:43can
26:44you
26:44find
26:45anybody
26:45who
26:45is
26:46willing
26:46to
26:46set
26:47up
26:47a
26:47factory
26:47in
26:47Bihar
26:48and
26:48the
26:48answer
26:49was
26:49not
26:49labor
26:49you
26:52know
26:52if
26:53I
26:53were
26:53to
26:53come
26:54in
26:54things
26:55are
26:55changing
26:55a
26:55little
26:56bit
26:56I
26:57think
26:57order
26:57is
26:57being
26:58restored
26:58but
26:59probably
27:00we
27:00need
27:00to
27:01do
27:01on
27:01law
27:01side
27:02but
27:02I
27:03think
27:03if
27:03you
27:03look
27:03at
27:04the
27:04governance
27:05structure
27:05whether
27:06it
27:06is
27:06Uttar
27:06Pradesh
27:07or
27:07Bihar
27:07there is
27:08a lot
27:08of
27:09focus
27:09on
27:10restoring
27:10order
27:11and
27:12particularly
27:13the
27:14corporate
27:14capital
27:15to be
27:16protected
27:16and
27:17to
27:17make
27:17sure
27:18that
27:18the
27:18corporate
27:18capital
27:19is
27:19not
27:19played
27:20around
27:20with
27:20so
27:21I
27:21think
27:21to
27:21that
27:22extent
27:22there
27:22is
27:23an
27:23attempt
27:23by
27:24the
27:24new
27:24governments
27:25in
27:25the
27:25last
27:25few
27:26years
27:26to
27:26restore
27:27order
27:28to
27:28what
27:29extent
27:29the
27:29law
27:30is
27:30enforced
27:30I
27:31think
27:31we
27:31can
27:31have
27:31a
27:31different
27:32debate
27:32so
27:33I
27:33mean
27:33you
27:34know
27:34whether
27:34it
27:34is
27:34you
27:35know
27:35in
27:36my
27:37view
27:37a
27:37great
27:37initiative
27:38of
27:38one
27:38district
27:38one
27:39brand
27:39and
27:41the
27:42kind
27:43of
27:44the
27:44manufacturing
27:44facilities
27:45that
27:45are
27:45coming
27:46around
27:46the
27:47mobile
27:48phone
27:49manufacturing
27:49systems
27:50I
27:51think
27:51these
27:51are
27:51all
27:52good
27:52signs
27:53but
27:53I
27:53think
27:53we
27:54have
27:54to
27:54move
27:54a
27:55lot
27:55more
27:55distance
27:56before
27:57we
27:57achieve
27:57what
27:57we
27:57need
27:58to
27:58achieve
27:58but
27:58mobile
27:59phones
27:59Apple
28:00we
28:00are
28:00still
28:00talking
28:00about
28:00Tamil Nadu
28:01we
28:01are
28:01talking
28:02about
28:02UP
28:03I
28:04mean
28:04the
28:04largest
28:05Samsung
28:05factory
28:06is
28:06in
28:07UP
28:07and
28:07Dixon
28:08which
28:08produces
28:09supplies
28:10a
28:12large
28:12number
28:12of
28:13components
28:14to
28:15many
28:15of
28:15these
28:16units
28:16has
28:17got
28:17a
28:17cluster
28:18of
28:18factories
28:18in
28:19Uttar
28:19Pradesh
28:19and
28:20they
28:20are
28:20very
28:20happy
28:20about
28:20the
28:20order
28:21I
28:22mean
28:22the
28:23governance
28:24guys
28:24will
28:24not
28:25be
28:26enforced
28:27so
28:27therefore
28:28we
28:28need
28:28to
28:29say
28:29that
28:29things
28:29are
28:30changing
28:30but
28:31not
28:31changing
28:31at
28:31the
28:31same
28:32pace
28:32that
28:32we
28:32need
28:32to
28:32you
28:33know
28:34I
28:35be
28:35talking
28:36governance
28:36right
28:36economics
28:38I don't
28:38think
28:39economics
28:39knows
28:39anything
28:40about
28:40governance
28:40if I
28:41might
28:41say
28:41so
28:41economics
28:43Nobel
28:44prizes
28:44the
28:45first
28:45woman
28:46to
28:47get
28:47a
28:47Nobel
28:47prize
28:47in
28:48economics
28:48after
28:4863
28:50men
28:51had
28:51got
28:52the
28:52prize
28:52and
28:52this
28:53was
28:53in
28:532008
28:54or
28:54something
28:55when I
28:55joined
28:55the
28:55planning
28:55commission
28:56and
28:57what
28:57was
28:57the
28:57Nobel
28:57prize
28:58for
28:58about
28:59how
28:59local
28:59communities
29:00govern
29:01their
29:02natural
29:02resources
29:02in an
29:03equitable
29:04fashion
29:04and a
29:04sustainable
29:05fashion
29:05she came
29:06to India
29:07to the
29:07planning
29:07commission
29:08and
29:08Nobel
29:08prize
29:08so
29:09we
29:09wanted
29:09the
29:09planning
29:09commission
29:10also
29:10to
29:10hear
29:11her
29:11and
29:11she
29:12was
29:12humble
29:12like a
29:12woman
29:12kept
29:13smiling
29:13and
29:14we
29:14say
29:15something
29:15we want
29:15to learn
29:16something
29:16from you
29:16she said
29:17I've
29:17come to
29:17India
29:18to go
29:19to
29:19Hyderabad
29:20where
29:20all the
29:21people
29:22are doing
29:22local
29:22work
29:23women
29:23led
29:23mostly
29:24community
29:25work
29:25on the
29:25environment
29:26all over
29:27and building
29:28livelihoods
29:28like
29:28SEVA
29:29and other
29:29organizations
29:30I come
29:31here every
29:31four or
29:31five years
29:32I do
29:32my
29:32research
29:32here
29:33India
29:33is the
29:33best
29:34example
29:34in the
29:35world
29:35of
29:35communities
29:36governing
29:36themselves
29:37but we
29:37don't look
29:38at that
29:38as a
29:39solution
29:39we're
29:39looking
29:40for
29:40what we
29:41can
29:41learn
29:41from
29:41elsewhere
29:42the
29:42second
29:42woman
29:43to get
29:44the
29:44Nobel
29:44prize
29:44is
29:45here
29:45Esther
29:45Duflo
29:46for
29:46micro
29:47economics
29:47here
29:47in
29:47Rajasthan
29:48and
29:49again
29:49the role
29:50of women
29:50in the
29:51governance
29:51so I
29:52want to
29:52just pick
29:52up the
29:52thread
29:53there is
29:53a feminine
29:54way
29:54of
29:55organizing
29:56a feminine
29:57way of
29:57being
29:58a feminine
29:59way of
29:59helping others
30:00and building
30:01families and
30:02communities
30:02and there's a
30:03masculine way
30:03of running
30:04armies and
30:04fighting armies
30:05let's hear from
30:06the
30:06woman
30:06so on
30:12this point
30:13I
30:14more than
30:14100%
30:15of course
30:15agree with
30:15you
30:16so all
30:19of
30:19you know
30:20all of
30:20our work
30:21shows
30:21that if
30:22we see
30:22employed
30:23men and
30:23women
30:24women spend
30:25on an
30:26average
30:26much lesser
30:27time at
30:27workplace
30:28than men
30:28but if
30:29you add
30:30up paid
30:30and unpaid
30:31household
30:32work
30:33you know
30:34put together
30:35women's
30:36work day
30:36is much
30:37much longer
30:37on an
30:38average
30:39than a
30:39man's
30:40work day
30:40and lot
30:41of it
30:42remains
30:42invisible
30:43going
30:44ahead
30:44one thing
30:45that is
30:45going to
30:46change
30:46in next
30:46few
30:46years
30:47is the
30:48amount
30:48of care
30:49that will
30:49have to
30:49be given
30:50for the
30:51elderly
30:51in the
30:51households
30:52India
30:52already has
30:53150 million
30:54elderly
30:54people
30:55most of
30:56them live
30:56with the
30:56families
30:57this will
30:58touch
30:58about 350
30:59million
30:59by 2050
31:00so unless
31:01we build
31:02some elderly
31:02care
31:03you know
31:03system
31:04most of
31:04it will
31:05be within
31:05the
31:05families
31:06most of
31:06it is
31:07done by
31:07women
31:08you know
31:08even now
31:09so I
31:10think the
31:10role of
31:10women in
31:11holding
31:11the families
31:12you know
31:13together
31:13and the
31:14villages
31:14together
31:15and system
31:15of course
31:16that one
31:17thing perhaps
31:17our state
31:18governments know
31:19that's why
31:19most of the
31:20transfers that
31:20happen from the
31:21state in terms
31:22of cash
31:22in most of the
31:23states they go to
31:24the women's
31:25account
31:25no offense to
31:26any men here
31:27but the evidence
31:27shows that if you
31:28go to the men's
31:29account the
31:29money you know
31:31it goes
31:33it doesn't come
31:33for the household
31:34you know
31:35household or the
31:36you know for the
31:36children's education
31:37it goes
31:38somewhere else
31:39so yeah
31:40indeed it's
31:41it's very
31:41primary the
31:42central role
31:43for the
31:43women
31:43three of
31:44those senior
31:45citizens are
31:46sitting here
31:46with you
31:47on this issue
31:48of law and
31:49governance and
31:49economics
31:50there is
31:53there is a
31:55whole body of
31:55work on economic
31:56freedom and
31:57what it does
31:59for economic
31:59growth
32:00and there are
32:01various indicators
32:02but what is
32:02really noteworthy
32:03is that the
32:04one indicator
32:06which correlates
32:07most highly
32:08to economic
32:09growth
32:09is law and
32:11order
32:11much more
32:13than sound
32:14money
32:14freedom to
32:15trade etc
32:16etc
32:17and I just
32:18want to go
32:18back to the
32:19point that if
32:19you break that
32:20down
32:21it can be said
32:22we're seeing
32:22more order
32:23we're not seeing
32:24more law
32:24we're not seeing
32:25better governors
32:26if you look at
32:28contract enforcement
32:29which is something
32:31which is primary
32:32to any business
32:33decision
32:33India ranks
32:34at the bottom
32:35around the world
32:37if you look at
32:38the number of
32:38people who are
32:39under trial
32:40have not been
32:41sentenced
32:42and are in jail
32:43India has the
32:44highest ratio
32:45in the world
32:45it's 67%
32:47that shows a
32:48complete abrogation
32:50of any concept
32:51of law
32:52so I think
32:53you know
32:53order is
32:54something which
32:55also exists in
32:56fascist societies
32:57but unless you
32:59have law
32:59you're not going
33:01to attract
33:01that's the question
33:02what law
33:03you see
33:04the history
33:04of human
33:05development
33:06is a conflict
33:08between property
33:09rights
33:09and human
33:11rights
33:11property rights
33:13is a foundation
33:13of law
33:14and have been
33:15for eons
33:16everywhere
33:16that a man
33:17or a woman
33:18man
33:19must have
33:20the right
33:21to protect
33:21his property
33:22and whatever
33:23he owns
33:24is his
33:24and no one
33:25else dare
33:26touch it
33:27and you can
33:28go to court
33:28if someone
33:29is infringing
33:29on your
33:30property rights
33:30human rights
33:32is a very
33:32recent idea
33:33just 200
33:34odd years
33:35ago
33:35and that
33:36all human
33:37beings
33:37men and
33:38women
33:38have equal
33:39rights
33:39even the
33:40United States
33:41did not get
33:41the same
33:42rights
33:42until 100
33:42years ago
33:43or less
33:43and that
33:44black people
33:45should have
33:45the same
33:46rights
33:46as white
33:46people
33:47the US
33:47is still
33:47struggling
33:48poor people
33:49should have
33:50the same
33:50right
33:51to shape
33:52the laws
33:52we're still
33:54struggling
33:54with that
33:54I'm saying
33:55to you
33:55listen to
33:56the rich
33:57people
33:57about what
33:58the laws
33:58should be
33:58they're
33:59better
33:59educated
34:00they have
34:00more
34:00power
34:00in
34:01democratic
34:02governments
34:02they lobby
34:03and they
34:03influence
34:04the laws
34:04so it
34:05is how
34:05the laws
34:06are framed
34:06and what
34:07the laws
34:07are about
34:08and this
34:08is the
34:09genuine
34:09democracy
34:09that the
34:10process
34:10of shaping
34:11our
34:11policies
34:12the process
34:12of shaping
34:13our laws
34:13is not
34:14hearing the
34:14voices
34:15of the
34:15powerless
34:16people
34:16that's
34:17very well
34:17founded
34:18but nevertheless
34:19the point
34:19is
34:19that's a
34:20separate
34:20process
34:21framing
34:21the laws
34:22but
34:22because
34:23sometimes
34:24you have
34:25to resist
34:25bad laws
34:26you have
34:26to resist
34:26bad laws
34:27if yes
34:28if someone
34:29says
34:29that look
34:30the black
34:31people should
34:32not be
34:32allowed to
34:32ride in
34:32a bus
34:33we are not
34:33having that
34:35discussion
34:35the discussion
34:36we are having
34:37is about
34:37laws which
34:38exist
34:39changing the
34:40laws is a
34:40different matter
34:41we have
34:41processes for
34:42that
34:42we are talking
34:43about laws
34:43I am sorry
34:44if Mahatma Gandhi
34:46says it's a
34:47bad law
34:47it is your
34:48duty to
34:48resist
34:48it
34:49I am not
34:50denying
34:50that
34:50the problem
34:52here is
34:52not bad
34:53laws
34:53the problem
34:55here is
34:55of enforcement
34:56and when
34:57you want
34:57to enforce
34:58even a
34:58good law
34:59and if
34:59you enforce
35:00it with
35:00your own
35:01political
35:02or social
35:02biases
35:03then you
35:03have a
35:04problem
35:04and I
35:05think
35:05the
35:05challenges
35:06that we
35:06face today
35:07is that
35:08kind of
35:08challenge
35:08exactly
35:09the lack
35:10of
35:10enforcement
35:10we have
35:11completely
35:12run out
35:12of time
35:12we have
35:12got three
35:13and a half
35:13minutes
35:13questions
35:14first a
35:15question
35:16from
35:16Vikram
35:17here
35:17sorry
35:18and then
35:18from that
35:19lady
35:19there
35:19and then
35:19we will
35:20see
35:20somebody
35:20get a
35:21mic
35:21here
35:21to
35:21Vikram
35:22in the
35:22front
35:22row
35:23and then
35:23that
35:23lady
35:24over
35:24there
35:24and
35:24then
35:24if
35:24we
35:24have
35:25time
35:25yeah
35:25can you
35:33give him
35:33this
35:33mic
35:33check
35:34hello
35:35can you
35:36hear me
35:37yeah
35:37thank you
35:38very much
35:39for the
35:40panel
35:40only we
35:41can hear
35:41you
35:41Vikram
35:42it's not
35:42coming
35:42over the
35:43page
35:43please
35:43take
35:44this
35:44yeah
35:47it's
35:47okay
35:47yeah
35:49thanks
35:51for the
35:52panel
35:52discussion
35:53I was
35:54a bit
35:54surprised
35:55as an
35:55entrepreneur
35:56myself
35:56I was
35:57a little
35:57amazed
35:58that
35:58talking
35:59of
35:59economic
35:59growth
36:00and
36:00development
36:00no one
36:02on the
36:02panel
36:03spoke
36:03about
36:03the
36:04role
36:04of
36:04entrepreneurs
36:04and the
36:05vibrancy
36:05of business
36:06and even
36:07China's
36:08growth
36:08in fact
36:10came on
36:11the back
36:11of a
36:12huge
36:13influx
36:13of
36:14entrepreneurialism
36:15from
36:16outside
36:16China
36:17including
36:18capital
36:18technologies
36:19and everything
36:20else
36:20so I
36:21was just
36:21wondering
36:22what
36:22accounts
36:23for this
36:23gap
36:24and if
36:24you are
36:24going to
36:25reimagine
36:25India's
36:26future
36:26without
36:27considering
36:27this
36:27vital
36:28aspect
36:28will
36:29the
36:29imagination
36:30lead
36:30to
36:30much
36:31great
36:32question
36:32I learned
36:35something
36:35Peter Drucker
36:37the great
36:37management
36:38consultant
36:38he would
36:39say he
36:40used to
36:40interview
36:41presidents
36:41and they
36:41talked
36:42to the
36:42vice
36:42and presidents
36:43of companies
36:43also
36:44and he
36:44said
36:45you know
36:45I have
36:46an hour
36:46with them
36:47and I
36:47don't want
36:48to waste
36:48my time
36:49asking
36:50them to
36:50give me
36:51the facts
36:51because every
36:52intelligent
36:52person can
36:53find the
36:54facts to
36:54suit his
36:55opinion
36:55I always
36:56start by
36:56asking what
36:57is your
36:57opinion
36:58and here
36:58it comes
36:59that when
36:59we have
36:59a theory
37:00that it
37:01must be
37:01private
37:02entrepreneurship
37:02we look
37:03for all
37:03the stories
37:04that there
37:04were private
37:05entrepreneurs
37:05but if I'm
37:06saying there
37:07was actually
37:07public sector
37:08which was
37:09being nurtured
37:10public sector
37:10which was
37:11being improved
37:11I'll give
37:12you that
37:12story
37:12that's a
37:13very big
37:13story
37:14so there
37:14are many
37:14many stories
37:15we pick
37:15and choose
37:16what suits
37:17our theory
37:18and this
37:18is where
37:19the learning
37:19I'm saying
37:19if you
37:20are going
37:21to really
37:21learn
37:22do not
37:23start off
37:24with a
37:24hypothesis
37:25and find
37:25the evidence
37:26to prove
37:26your hypothesis
37:27open and say
37:27what should
37:28be the
37:28question
37:28yeah in fact
37:30we had
37:31entrepreneurship
37:32and innovation
37:33and I think
37:33we just
37:34didn't get
37:34there in
37:35terms of
37:35time
37:35but I
37:36do think
37:37entrepreneurship
37:37among young
37:38people in
37:38India is
37:39amazing
37:39you know
37:40I'm
37:40associated
37:41with
37:41emergent
37:42ventures
37:43grant
37:44and they
37:45give grant
37:45to lot
37:46of young
37:46teenage
37:47entrepreneurs
37:47but it
37:48is the
37:49issue
37:49that what
37:49happens
37:50to them
37:50later on
37:51you know
37:51how they
37:52scale up
37:52whether there
37:53is market
37:53access
37:54you know
37:54those are
37:55the things
37:55we are
37:55falling short
37:56so no denying
37:57the importance
37:58of entrepreneurship
37:59only thing
37:59eventually they
38:00will need
38:01to get
38:01large
38:01to create
38:02jobs
38:02otherwise
38:03several
38:03otherwise
38:04entrepreneurship
38:05in India
38:06is much
38:06more than
38:07we need
38:07most of
38:08the employment
38:09is self
38:09employment
38:09in India
38:10so by
38:10nature
38:11that is
38:11you know
38:12entrepreneur
38:13but we
38:13don't want
38:13that kind
38:14of entrepreneurship
38:15right
38:15see we want
38:16a different
38:16kind of
38:16entrepreneurship
38:17so
38:17you know
38:18I just
38:19tell you
38:19it's a
38:19very important
38:20point
38:20I think
38:21India
38:21is facing
38:22a challenge
38:23where entrepreneurship
38:24is kind of a
38:27demise of sorts
38:28I'll tell you why
38:28it's because
38:29the financialization
38:31of the Indian
38:31economy
38:32has been so
38:32strong
38:33that today's
38:34entrepreneurs
38:34the next generation
38:35of entrepreneurs
38:36are actually
38:37finding it easier
38:38to use that money
38:39and financializing
38:40and working
38:41against
38:41you tell me
38:42you tell me
38:42one thing
38:43the ease
38:45of doing
38:45business
38:45the much
38:46used phrase
38:47in this
38:47country
38:47is it
38:49creating
38:49enough
38:49ease
38:50of doing
38:50business
38:51here
38:51why is it
38:52that we
38:52have a
38:52net FDI
38:53which is
38:53zero
38:54this is
38:55because
38:56the same
38:56guys
38:57who have
38:57the money
38:58and the
38:58surplus
38:58they are
38:59probably
38:59you know
39:00reinvesting
39:01abroad
39:01we're going
39:03to take
39:03two more
39:03minutes
39:04based on
39:05the fact
39:05that we
39:05started
39:06late
39:06we'll take
39:07a question
39:07from the
39:07lady
39:08there
39:08we
39:10talked a
39:12little bit
39:12about
39:12bad laws
39:14but ideally
39:14I was
39:15curious
39:15we've seen
39:16a recent
39:17sort of
39:18weakening
39:18of the
39:19labour laws
39:20in India
39:20over the
39:21past few
39:21years
39:22and what
39:22that
39:23means
39:23for
39:24young
39:25and
39:25old
39:25people
39:26working
39:26I just
39:28wanted
39:28to get
39:29your
39:29thoughts
39:29do you
39:30think
39:30this
39:30is
39:30a
39:30sort
39:31of
39:31political
39:33thing
39:34that
39:34we
39:34can
39:34see
39:35will
39:35fix
39:36itself
39:36or
39:36do you
39:37think
39:37it's
39:37a
39:37worrying
39:38trend
39:38where
39:39it's
39:39going
39:39to
39:39back
39:40slide
39:40and
39:41India
39:41is
39:42sort
39:42of
39:42going
39:42to
39:42be
39:43susceptible
39:44and
39:45it
39:45be a
39:45place
39:46where
39:46people
39:46can
39:47some
39:48issues
39:48be
39:48able
39:49on
39:49and
39:50I'd
39:53like
39:54to
39:54because
39:54this
39:54is
39:54my
39:55subject
39:55in
39:55the
39:55planning
39:55commission
39:56yes
39:56I
39:57think
39:58I
39:58would
39:58just
39:58say
39:59one
39:59thing
39:59like
39:59on
40:00both
40:00entire
40:00service
40:01sector
40:01in
40:01India
40:01is
40:02to
40:02the
40:02entire
40:02IT
40:03sector
40:03the
40:04labor
40:04activity
40:05is
40:05very
40:05high
40:05and
40:06that
40:06is
40:07you
40:07know
40:07of course
40:07there
40:07are
40:08many
40:08other
40:08reasons
40:08why
40:09manufacturing
40:09did not
40:10succeed
40:10and
40:11IT
40:11service
40:11succeed
40:12you
40:12know
40:13I
40:14can't
40:14do
40:14far
40:14much
40:15physical
40:15infrastructure
40:15and
40:16all that
40:16such
40:16land
40:17and
40:17all
40:17and
40:17so
40:17forth
40:18but
40:18also
40:18there
40:18is
40:19total
40:19level
40:19flexibility
40:20on both
40:20the
40:20sides
40:21right
40:21on the
40:22involved
40:22side
40:22and
40:23on the
40:23involved
40:23side
40:23and
40:23these
40:24are
40:24the
40:24sectors
40:24which
40:25flourish
40:25so
40:26you
40:27know
40:27flexibility
40:28of
40:28labor
40:28doesn't
40:29mean
40:29always
40:29necessarily
40:30exploitation
40:31of
40:31labor
40:31but
40:31of course
40:32it
40:32needs
40:32to be
40:32implemented
40:33correctly
40:33and
40:34we
40:35look
40:35out
40:36for
40:36the
40:36basic
40:36rights
40:37and
40:37all
40:38that
40:39stuff
40:39but
40:39it
40:40is
40:40perhaps
40:40a
40:40wrong
40:40notion
40:41that
40:41very
40:42strong
40:43labor
40:44law
40:44protecting
40:45labor
40:45really
40:45benefits
40:46labor
40:46so
40:47it
40:47is
40:47not
40:47enough
40:48job
40:48again
40:49a
40:49question
40:49of
40:49what
40:50labor
40:50laws
40:50but
40:51let's
40:51go back
40:51to the
40:52fundamentals
40:52we
40:53say
40:53that
40:54the
40:55human
40:55beings
40:55are
40:55the
40:56only
40:56assets
40:57that
40:57any
40:57enterprise
40:58or
40:58nation
40:58has
40:58that
40:59can
40:59learn
40:59and
41:00improve
41:00its
41:00own
41:00capabilities
41:01and
41:02therefore
41:02it's
41:03an
41:03appreciating
41:04asset
41:04but
41:05in a
41:06perhaps
41:06into
41:07national
41:07GDP
41:07accounts
41:08where
41:08do
41:09we
41:09show
41:09labor
41:10human
41:11resources
41:12we
41:12put
41:13them
41:13into
41:13the
41:13profit
41:14and
41:14loss
41:14account
41:14to
41:15be
41:15let
41:15go
41:15when
41:16times
41:16are
41:16hard
41:16to
41:17be
41:17search
41:19around
41:19for
41:19some
41:19talent
41:20when
41:20we
41:20need
41:20some
41:20more
41:21of
41:21it
41:21on
41:22the
41:22asset
41:22side
41:22we
41:22show
41:23building
41:23machinery
41:24capital
41:24okay
41:25those
41:26things
41:26and we
41:26say
41:26depreciate
41:27also
41:27with
41:27time
41:28the
41:28one
41:28asset
41:29that
41:30one
41:30has
41:30which
41:31can
41:31not
41:31only
41:31improve
41:31its
41:32own
41:32capability
41:32but
41:33by
41:33its
41:33intelligence
41:34improve
41:34the
41:34productivity
41:35of
41:36your
41:36machines
41:36and
41:36your
41:36buildings
41:37and
41:37your
41:37materials
41:37is
41:38human
41:39beings
41:39and
41:39that's
41:39a
41:40Japanese
41:40genius
41:40after
41:41the
41:41war
41:41wars
41:41they
41:42were
41:42short
41:42of
41:42capital
41:43and
41:43short
41:44of
41:44new
41:44technology
41:44but
41:45they
41:45had
41:45human
41:45beings
41:46and
41:46they
41:46said
41:47lifetime
41:47employment
41:48and
41:48their
41:48labor
41:49laws
41:49or
41:49not
41:50labor
41:50laws
41:50it
41:51was
41:51the
41:52law
41:52of
41:53the
41:53society
41:54that
41:54a
41:55human
41:55being
41:55at
41:55work
41:56must
41:56be
41:56treated
41:56with
41:57the
41:57most
41:57respect
41:57and
41:58kept
41:58and
41:59as
41:59they
41:59got
41:59older
42:00you
42:00don't
42:00let
42:00them
42:01go
42:01because
42:01they
42:01have
42:01the
42:01experience
42:02the
42:02tacit
42:02knowledge
42:03which
42:03is
42:03really
42:04what
42:04is
42:04required
42:04so
42:05we
42:05go
42:05away
42:06from
42:06this
42:06lifetime
42:07employment
42:07is a
42:08bad
42:08thing
42:08public
42:08sector
42:09does
42:09it
42:09and
42:10so
42:10we
42:10just
42:10change
42:10fundamentally
42:11that
42:12if
42:12I
42:12want
42:12to
42:12nurture
42:12human
42:13beings
42:13I
42:14got
42:14to
42:14give
42:14them
42:14opportunities
42:15to
42:16stay
42:16and
42:17learn
42:17and
42:17make
42:17mistakes
42:26flexibility
42:27on
42:27the
42:27P&L
42:28side
42:28let
42:29go
42:29take
42:29let
42:30go
42:30take
42:30whereas
42:31in
42:31Germany
42:32and
42:32Japan
42:32all
42:33the
42:33labor
42:33laws
42:34are
42:34to
42:35make
42:35sure
42:35that
42:35employers
42:36find
42:36it
42:36difficult
42:37to
42:37let
42:37go
42:37people
42:38you
42:38have
42:39to
42:39invest
42:39in
42:39them
42:40and
42:40build
42:41their
42:42capabilities
42:42and
42:42so
42:43Germany
42:43and
42:44Japan
42:44are
42:45the
42:45manufacturing
42:45powerhouses
42:46in spite
42:47of
42:47very
42:48expensive
42:48currencies
42:49they
42:49were
42:49unfortunately
42:50we
42:51have
42:51completely
42:52run
42:52out of
42:52time
42:53so
42:55that
42:55has
42:56in the
42:56past
42:56thanks
42:57so
42:57much
42:58thank
42:58you
42:58for
42:59being
42:59such
42:59as
42:59as
43:00as
43:00we're
43:00going
43:00in
43:00this
43:00family
43:00I
43:01love
43:01the
43:01time
Comments

Recommended