PRIVATISATION OF PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS
PM
RBI had constituted an Expert Committee to Review Governance of Boards of Banks in India (Ref.PR dt 20th Jan'14) The Expert Committee was requested to examine, inter alia, the working of banks’ boards including whether adequate time is devoted to issues of strategy, growth, governance and risk management; to review central bank regulatory guidelines on bank ownership, ownership concentration and representation in the board; to analyse the representation on banks’ boards to see whether the boards have the appropriate mix of capabilities and the necessary independence to govern the institution, and to investigate possible conflicts of interest in board representation, including among owner representatives and regulators.
The recommendations, includes privatisation of public sector banks by reducing the government's equity capital in banks to less than 51 per cent.All India Bank Employees Association has stated that they shall give a call for strike if the report is not rejected.
"People's money should be available for people's welfare and not for private loot through private control," AIBEA General Secretary C H Venkatachalam told PTI, adding that the AIBEA would organise countrywide demonstrations, rallies and other protest programmes demanding rejection of the Nayak Committee report.
PM
Dear Friends,
The Text of Cir. No.: 2014/90 dated 15.05.2014 issued by All India bank Retirees Federation on P.J.Nayak Committee Recommendations to
its Office-Bearers/ Central Committee Members/ Chief of State Bodies is reproduced here under for information:
"Re: P.J. Nayak Committee Recommendations on Governance of
Boards of Banks in India Committee was constituted by Reserve Bank of India
under the chairmanship of Shri P.J.Naik to review governance of Boards of banks in
India.
“The committee has submitted the recommendations which will have far reaching consequences on functioning and ownership of public sector banks in India. If recommendations given by this committee are implemented all public sector banks will stand privatised and will get status they were enjoying before nationalisation of banks in 1969
including adding “ Limited” word with their names.
MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE
(1) Government holding in public sector should be brought below 51 percent.
(2) Nationalisation Act and State Bank of India Act should be repealed
(3) The public sector should be incorporated under Companies Act and word “Limited” should be added with the respective name as per the legal requirement of this act.
(4) The public sector banks will come out of purview of CVC/CBI (5) Performance of public sector will not be monitored by Finance Ministry.
(6) Equity owned by the government after reducing holding below 51 percent should be transferred to the newly formed Investment Company.
(7) Banks will have to arrange requirement of additional capital either from internal generation or tapping the capital market and will not look to the government for budgetary support.
(8) Bank functioning and survivalThese recommendations if implemented are nothing but an attempt to
privatise public sector banks and hand over huge national financial resources mobilised in last 45 years in the hands of corporate sector which will be used for their benefits rather than for welfare of common man.
The report of the committee will be placed for adoption before the new government which will be in place in next few days.
(The full report is available on Reserve Bank of India web-site.)
CONSEQUENCES AND EFFECT COMMITTEE ARE IMPLEMENTED IF
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTE ARE IMPLEMENTEDC
(1 ) The employees and retirees will lose WRIT JURISTICTION to protect their legal right. Legal recourse available will be through civil suits
(2) On scrapping the Nationalisation Act, constitutional guarantee available at present for payment of pension will stand withdrawn.
(3) Bipartite mechanism available for deciding service conditions of employees / retirees may be under threat
(4) Individual private banks may adopt hire and fire policy endangering job security.
(5) Nation savings and precious financial resources will go under the control of private hands which could threaten financial stability of the country which we have witness in western countries during sub-prime crisis of 2008.
AIBRF STAND
We strongly oppose these recommendation and if implemented could prove dangerous and divesting for the nation and common people. We shall lunch agitational programme if the recommendations are not rejected by the government.
We understand that unions are opposing recommendations of Nayak Committee.
Regards
Yours Sincerely.
( S.C.JAIN )
GENERAL SECRETARY”
Manikanddan Kv
--
Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bankpensioner.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
God Be With Us
PM
L S RAMAN
JSOMA SHEKARA
L S RAMAN
.For complying with Basal committee recommendations GOI has to deploy the profit towards recapitalization, instead of proposing privatization. This is perhaps the tactical move of the former Finance Minister to avoid the recapitalization responsibility. Let the former Govt credit to the exchequer the lakhs of crores of Taxpayers money looted by their ministers as authentic information made availeble to the public.
JSOMA SHEKARA
Bank unions have a strong leaning towards left and with their decimation, they are likely to adopt confrontationist attitude towards BJP and their economic reform policies. Left parties having dwindling base even in states like West Bengal and Kerala, will like to exploit Bank unions to protest against the Central government policies or economic reforms and privatization. This will directly impact bankers as they may have to go on strikes more frequently on such issues which have no or little relevance for bankers. To sugar-coat such protests, UFBU is likely to use wage revision as a “curtain”. They may like to declare strike on economic issues but may include honorable ‘wage revision’ as one of the demands. Thus, I am of view that if no pressure is created by bankers, these Bank Unions will like to longer in concluding 10th BPS than what it would have been under normal circumstances. Thus, be aware of the tactics that may be adopted for further delay in negotiations by Left supported bank unions;
JSOMA SHEKARA
Nagaraju Kakani
atamjit singh
anil jain
Dear Friends it is not in the manifesto of BJP.
disinvestment is not in the agenda of Modi.
the report will go to dogs
anil jain
On Tue, 20 May 2014 16:05:47 +0530 wrote
 |
Get your own FREE website, FREE domain & FREE mobile app with Company email. | Know More > |
cpvnair
FOR GOD's SAKE,PLEASE POST ONLY CONFIRMED NEWS .THERE IS A SAYING THAT EVEN IF YOU GIFT ELEPHANT, DO NOT GIFT HOPES.
warm reg
CPVNAIR
VRS
JSOMA SHEKARA
****************************************************************
PSU banks need to free themselves from government influence: Raghuram Rajan
Pitching for greater operational flexibility to public sector banks, Reserve Bank Governor Raghuram Rajan today said they can become more competitive by distancing themselves from government influence.
“If public sector banks become competitive, and especially if they do so by distancing themselves from the influence of the government without sacrificing their ‘public’ character, they will be able to raise money much more easily from the markets.
“Indeed, the better performers will be able to raise more, unlike the current situation where the not so good performers have a greater call on the public purse. Competition will improve efficiency,” he said.
The remarks came in his annual day lecture of the Competition Commission of India (CCI).
Rajan said there are well-managed public sector banks across the world and even in India today.
“So, privatisation is not necessary to improve the competitiveness of the public sector. But a change in governance, management, and operational and compensation flexibility are almost surely needed in India to improve the functioning of most PSBs, as the P J Nayak Committee has just reiterated,” he added.
The Governor said a number of eminently practicable suggestions have been made to reform PSBs, such as creating a holding company to hold government PSB shares, increasing the length of PSB CEO tenures, breaking up the position of Chairman and CEO and bringing more independent professionals on bank boards, among others.
“We need to examine all these ideas carefully, many of which will help give public sector banks the flexibility to compete in the new environment,” Rajan said.
He noted that in the past PSBs had the best talent. But today, past hiring freezes have decimated their middle management ranks, and private banks have also poached talented personnel from PSBs.
“PSBs need to be able to recruit laterally, while retaining the talent they have, but to do so they need to be able to promise employees responsibility as well as the freedom of action,” he added.
Referring to financial inclusion, Rajan said the RBI will come out with new relaxations on business correspondents shortly.
Also, he said some of the entities that become payments banks may be very well suited to support or substitute commercial banks in reaching remote areas.
“In sum then, we can increase competition in the banking sector while, at the same time, strengthening banks by reducing the burden of obligations on them,” he said.
Speaking on the occasion, Competition Commission of India (CCI) chairman Ashok Chawla said the regulator has so far imposed more than Rs 8,000 crore worth penalties on various entities for anti-competitive practices.
The Commission has dealt with cases related to diverse sectors, he added.
He also said the regulator has so far received about 170 files pertaining to combination of entities.
CCI, which keeps a tab on unfair trade practices across sectors, has completed five years of existence.
PM
Manikanddan Kv
PM
For Information:
The full text of Cir. No. UFBU/2014/23, dated 28.05.2014, issued by Convenor,United Forum of Bank Unions, addressed to the Governor, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai on rejection of Nayak Panel Report is reproduced here under for information:
“We, the United Forum of Bank Unions (UFBU), the umbrella forum of all workmen unions and officers’ associations in the industry, representing 10 lac bank employees and officers, are shocked to observe the retrograde recommendations of the P J Nayak Committee, which was appointed by RBI to “Review Governance of Boards of Banks in India”.
We strongly condemn the retrograde recommendations of the Nayak Panel as they are detrimental to the interests of general public and the nation on the whole and demand for unequivocal rejection of the said Report for the reasons
as under:
• The report contains only one-sided analysis as majority of the members on the Nayak Committee belongs to private bank/organisations and due representation to Public Sector bodies is not given;
• A deliberate attempt against public sector system is visible as no cognizance is given to the benefits derived out of Nationalisation of Banks towards the economic growth and the prosperity of the country since nationalization in 1969.
02. It is a known fact that in the year 1969, a major decision was taken by the then Prime Minister, Late Smt. Indira Gandhi to nationalize major banks in order to expand bank credit to priority areas, which were neglected till then.
03. The objectives of nationalization of commercial banks can be attributed mainly towards Social Welfare, Control of Private Monopolies, Expansion of Banking, Reduction of Regional Imbalances, Priority Sector Lending and for
Development of banking habit. More particularly to ensure that the major financial resource of the Country mobilized through public savings/deposits is at the disposal of the Government but not in the hands of a few industrialists/Corporate houses.
04. There is no denying fact that banks have done good work in socio-economic transformation and until 1990s, the nationalised banks grew at a pace of around 4%, closer to the average growth rate of the Indian economy. It is to be noted that the deposits in Public Sector Banks have increased due to increasing confidence of public that their funds are safe and secured.
05. It will not be out of context to mention here that the UFBU is strongly opposed to the reform measures in the financial sector as it is detrimental to the interests of the Nation on the whole.
06. It is quite unfortunate that the insulation provided to the economy of the Country by the regulatory system of Public Sector Banks during the economic recession in 2008 is completely forgotten and once again attempts are beingmade to privatise the Public Sector Banks.
07. We strongly oppose the following retrograde recommendations, among others of P J Nayak Committee:
a. The Committee insists on capital requirement quoting that the capital of public sector banks has significantly eroded with the proportion of stressed assets rising rapidly, without proper assessment of reasons and individuals/
organisations behind the increased stressed Assets/NPAs and consequential erosion in capital, and recommends that the public sector banks be brought under the control of those defaulters, who are responsible for erosion in capitalof public sector banks;
b. The Committee recommends for radical reform measures, which would bring back the pre-nationalisation concept of class-banking;
c. The committee proposes that the Government shall distance itself from several bank governance functions which it presently discharges and recommends that the Bank Nationalisation Acts of 1970 and 1980 together with SBI Act and the SBI (Subsidiary Banks) Act be repealed, means privatizing all the Public Sector Banks, which will pave way for spread of the monopoly enterprise. Further, Banks collect savings from the general public and if it is in the hands of private sector, the national interests may be neglected. The nationalization of banks ensured the availability of resources to the priority sectors. Besides, nationalized banks command more confidence of the customers about the safety of their deposits.
d. The committee opines that difficulties in public sector banks arise from several externally imposed constraints and suggests for reduction of Government stake to less than 50 per cent and raising the limit of investor’s voting rights to 26 per cent from the existing 10 per cent to pave way for private control, neglecting the fact that India aims at socialism and this objective can only be achieved with the financial institutions under the control of Government and especially through nationalization. Rather, to control externally imposed constraints, there are ways and means to ensure moreautonomy to Public Sector Banks not necessarily by reduction of the Government stake.
08. The report of the P J Nayak Committee recommendations aimed at privatization of public sector banks, merger of banks, more flexible bank licensing policy, etc. which would benefit only the private players and in no way would be beneficial to the common general public and the Nation on the whole.
The report of the Nayak Committee is biased, anti-public, anti-national and Pro imperialistic and hence we demand for outright rejection of the P J Nayak Committee Report on review of governance of boards of Banks in India in toto and provide justice And support to government initiatives in Financial Inclusion by spreading the bank services to every nook and corner of the country.We hope for the positive response in the matter."
Yours sincerely,
(M.V.Murali)
CONVENOR”
JSOMA SHEKARA
JSOMA SHEKARA
Don’t mess with the banking sector-The Hindu
By SriT. T. RAM MOHAN
Government ownership has been a factor underpinning stability in banking
As the new Finance Minister, Arun Jaitley, comes to grips with his portfolio, he will need to quickly focus on the banking sector. Today, Public Sector Banks (PSBs), which account for over 70 per cent of assets in the banking system, are bogged down by a rise in non-performing assets. This has eroded their profitability and limited their ability to raise the regulatory capital needed to make loans.
A Reserve Bank of India (RBI) committee on bank governance, headed by P.J. Nayak, has a ready solution: free PSBs from government control and eventually privatise them. It is a solution that is fraught with both political and economic risk. Mr Jaitley must steer clear of such quick fixes.
The Nayak committee’s case for privatisation rests on the presumed superior efficiency of private sector banks. It thinks that if only the government gave up its controlling function and became a passive investor instead, it would stand to make enormous returns on its shareholding.
Problems with the
proposition
There are serious problems with this proposition. One, it is based on a comparison of performance of PSBs and private sector banks at a time when PSBs are weighed down by the problems of the economy at large. It would be more appropriate to compare performance over a longer period. A wide range of academic studies points to a trend towards convergence in performance of PSBs and private banks since banking sector reforms were set in motion in 1993-‘94.
Two, such comparisons are flawed by what is called ‘survivor bias’ in the private sector group. Several new private sector banks licensed after 1994 have ceased to exist. Precisely for this reason, they would not be found in the private bank group used for comparison. This lends an upward bias to the performance indicators of private banks.
Three, the comparisons ignore the scope of activities of PSBs and private banks. PSBs have an important development role. They took upon themselves the task of funding private investment in infrastructure which was an important driver of growth in the boom period of 2004-08. Private banks can be more choosy about what they wish to fund. Many are focussed on the retail segment, working capital and wealth management. Foreign banks make enormous profit out of their capital markets division alone. If PSBs were to adopt such a narrow focus, sectors that are crucial to the economy would be starved of credit.
From a flawed starting point, the committee moves on to a diagnosis and a prescription that are even more flawed. The committee thinks the PSBs are doing badly because their boards are dysfunctional. The government packs the boards with its own people. The boards go through the motions of approving proposals put up by the management. Little thought is given to issues of strategy and risk management. In contrast, private banks have high-quality professionals on their boards that provide sage counsel. This, the committee contends, is what explains superior private sector performance.
The solution? The government should distance itself from bank boards. The committee wants government shareholding to be transferred to a Bank Investment Company (BIC). The Bank Nationalisation Act and other related Acts must be repealed and PSBs brought under the scope of the Companies Act. The BIC would appoint members of boards of PSBs as well as their CEOs and executive directors. It would let its stakes in PSBs fall below 50 per cent so that banks are freed from limits on remuneration, the Right to Information Act and the jurisdiction of the Central Vigilance Commissioner.
Freed from these vexations, the PSBs can single-mindedly focus on profit maximisation. Eventually, the BIC would transfer its ownership powers to the bank boards. The government’s stake in the BIC itself would fall below 50 per cent, thereby privatising these banks. We would enter a brave new world of Indian banking liberated from the stranglehold of government ownership.
The committee’s faith in the functioning of private bank boards is truly touching. If boards in the private sector are such paragons of virtue, the committee must tell us why some of the biggest banks in the U.S. and the U.K., whose boards were packed with glittering names from the corporate world, collapsed in the financial crisis of 2007.
To cite only one example, the U.K. regulator, the Financial Services Authority (FSA), looked into the collapse of the Royal Bank of Scotland, the biggest banking failure in the country’s history. Its report noted that there was an almost complete lack of questioning and challenge on the part of the board in the critical years when the bank hurtled towards ruin. There was nothing wrong with the composition of the board.
Boards in general are dysfunctional, whether in the private sector or the public sector. The remedies must, therefore, be generic in nature. The Companies Act 2013 and clause 49 of Securities and Exchange Board of India’s listing agreement now contain clauses that are intended to improve the functioning of boards, in particular, that of independent directors.
In banking, the regulator needs to go further. ‘Fit and proper’ criteria for board members must be strengthened and the RBI might adopt the FSA’s practice of interviewing candidates proposed for a directorship on a bank board. For banks above a certain size, there could be a requirement that positions be advertised and nominations sought from eminent persons so that a wide pool of talent is tapped. The RBI may stipulate that bank boards contain expertise in areas such as risk management and marketing of financial services. Board effectiveness could be measured using outside experts.
These measures would help strengthen boards. We must recognise, however, that there is only so much that boards can contribute. It is the quality of management that is crucial to performance. In PSBs, this must be the government’s responsibility.
The government does not have to discharge this responsibility through diktat from the finance ministry. It can operate through its nominees on the board. The government nominees and the RBI nominee on PSB boards must ensure that there is proper succession planning and that managers are groomed for various levels of leadership.
Opposing privatisation
It is unlikely that the Nayak committee’s proposals will go through in the near future. Political parties and trade unions will oppose any move towards privatisation. This will make the repeal of various Acts difficult, given the present composition of the Rajya Sabha. Selling government stakes in PSBs without turning them around is bound to invite accusations of a ‘scam’. No government can risk distancing itself from control of PSBs and handing over these to a group of professional managers at a time when banks are severely stressed.
That apart, we need to be clear about the basic rationale for government ownership in banking in India. There is more to it than the larger social purpose of banking. Our experience has been that government ownership has been a factor underpinning stability in banking. The world over, economies have faced banking crises over the past several decades. Banks failed, they were nationalised or bailed out, then turned over to the private sector. This is the phenomenon of socialisation of losses and privatisation of profits that has come to attract public outrage.
India’s experience has been refreshingly different. The Indian approach has been to have the public sector dominate banking while exposing it to competition. In the process, efficiency has improved without jeopardising stability. Experience has shown that it is possible to retain the public sector as the sheet anchor of the banking system without compromising on efficiency.
Addressing the issues of governance at PSBs requires focus on the part of the finance ministry. Mr. Jaitley doesn’t have to look very far for inspiration. One of Narendra Modi’s less heralded achievements as Chief Minister of Gujarat was his success in turning around state PSUs by professionalising their boards and giving management a free hand.
(Ram Mohan is a professor at IIM Ahmedabad.
jagadheesan m.j
L S RAMAN
bhaskara sarma
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:14 AM, JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com> wrote:
However UFBU seems to have taken matter as casual.Though above steps of DOS does not indicate govt will reduce its stake at present but gradually things may come to that.RBI has no role and Govt will not seek recommendations of RBI to implement reforms. Govt has its own agenda. Also it is reported that DFS has taken the issue on priority basis and a policy will be formulated shortly.On NPAs the govt is looking to revamp laws to make recovery of bad debts more effective."Sources also said the the Govt told the Finance Minister that the new mechanism for differentiated banks was on the cards to push financial inclusions, which will now taken up in mission mode. RBI is expected to issue bank licenses after four months and it will then seek applications from interested players.For the current year the govt has provided Rs. 11200 for bank capitalization and is asking banks to tap the capital markets to raise more equity.A road map for for the next five years for recapitalization of banks will be drawn up, sources said adding that the calculations were based on government holding staying above 58%."The Department of Financial Services has also proposed setting up a holding company for state run banks to deal with the issue of raising capital. A panel of secretaries had proposed a holding company structure in 2012 while P.J.Nayak committee set up by RBI has also proposed a similar mechanism.UFBU choose to submit a protest letter to RBI. But actual deliberations and action plan on Nayak report is being done at Finance Ministry.Please go through the following report in TOI dated 30.05.2014.
All constituents of UFBU must have discussions with PM and Finance Minister and convince them the need to retain public character of banks immediately before a policy is formulated and passed in the budget session proposed in JULY.
Present Govt may not approve Dharnas and Strikes when all avenues are opened by PM for dialogues unlike previous Govt.On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 2:11 AM, PM <moha...@gmail.com> wrote:
For Information:
The full text of Cir. No. UFBU/2014/23, dated 28.05.2014, issued by Convenor,United Forum of Bank Unions, addressed to the Governor, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai on rejection of Nayak Panel Report is reproduced here under for information:
“We, the United Forum of Bank Unions (UFBU), the umbrella forum of all workmen unions and officers’ associations in the industry, representing 10 lac bank employees and officers, are shocked to observe the retrograde recommendations of the P J Nayak Committee, which was appointed by RBI to “Review Governance of Boards of Banks in India”.
We strongly condemn the retrograde recommendations of the Nayak Panel as they are detrimental to the interests of general public and the nation on the whole and demand for unequivocal rejection of the said Report for the reasons
as under:
• The report contains only one-sided analysis as majority of the members on the Nayak Committee belongs to private bank/organisations and due representation to Public Sector bodies is not given;
• A deliberate attempt against public sector system is visible as no cognizance is given to the benefits derived out of Nationalisation of Banks towards the economic growth and the prosperity of the country since nationalization in 1969.
02. It is a known fact that in the year 1969, a major decision was taken by the then Prime Minister, Late Smt. Indira Gandhi to nationalize major banks in order to expand bank credit to priority areas, which w
--M.J.Jagadheesanmobile:9444642231
Daulat Munot
bhaskara sarma
L S RAMAN
--
JSOMA SHEKARA
PM
For Information:
All India Bank Employees Association vide its cir.letter No.27/66/2014/22 dated 3rd June, 2014, addressed to its Office Bearers / All Units instructed to submit memorandum to RBI to protest against P J Nayak Committee’s recommendations on privatisation of Public Sector Banks the copy of which is furnished here under:
"Dear Comrades,
Units are aware that the RBI appointed P J Nayak Committee has submitted its report with wide-ranging and serious recommendations some of which are as under:
· Privatise the Public Sector Banks
· Government’s capital should be reduced to less than 50 %
· Merger of Banks
· Design a new governance structure
· Better compensation for Chairman and EDs
· Keep PSBs out of CVC, RTI Act, etc.
· Bank Investment Company should be created under Companies Act which will control the Banks
· The CEO of BIC should be a private equity investment professional
· Ownership of Banks should be transferred to this BIC
· Government should not issue any regulatory instructions to Banks.
· Bank Nationalisation Act should be repealed and Banks should be covered by Companies Act.
· Ownership functions should be handed over by the Government to the BIC
· Government should not appoint any Directors in the Banks. BIC will do that.
· RBI Nominee Directors in the Banks should step down.
· Voting rights should be increased to 26 %
There is no need to explain or elaborate that these recommendations are retrograde and have to be fought back through bitter struggles. RBI has invited views and comments on the Report to be submitted to them before 12th June, 2014. While we shall be chalking out our agitational programmes on this issue shortly, we advise all our units – a) State Federations, b) All India Bankwise Organisations, c) all bankwise affiliated units in each State , d) District/Town Organisations, and e) our units from RRBs and Co-operative Banks to send the letter to the RBI as per the draft given herein.
These letters should be sent immediately on receipt of their Circular and copy of the same should be sent to the Central office of AIBEA.
With greetings, Yours Comradely,
(C.H.VENKATACHALAM) GENERAL SECRETARY"
"Chief General Manager
Reserve Bank of India
Dept. of Banking Operations and Development
12th Floor, Central Office,
Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg,
Fort, Mumbai-400001
Dear Sir,
Our attention has been drawn to the recommendations contained in the P J Nayak Committee’s Report on Governance of Boards of Banks in India. The Committee’s recommendations like reducing the Government’s equity in PSBS to less than 50%, Merger of Banks, Design a new governance structure, Keep PSBs out of CVC, RTI Act, Bank Investment Company should be created under Companies Act which will control the Banks, CEO of BIC should be a private equity investment professional, Ownership of Banks should be transferred to this BIC, Government should not issue any regulatory instructions to Banks, Bank Nationalisation Act should be repealed and Banks should be covered by Companies Act, Ownership functions should be handed over by the Government to the BIC, Government should not appoint any Directors in the Banks, RBI Nominee Directors in the Banks should step down, Voting rights should be increased to 26 % , etc. are highly objectionable and unwarranted to the needs and safety of our public sector banks.
What is needed is strengthening the public sector banks, bringing all private Banks under public sector and enabling banking sector to be engines of economic growth and development. What is needed is strong and stringent measures to recover the huge defaulted loans from the corporate, industrial and business enterprises and not measures to hand over our PSBs to the same private sector.
We express our strong opposition to the same and demand outright rejection of the Report. "
S.R. CHOWDHRY
I fully endorse your views. It is weakness of unions or their indifference which is prolonging the talks.
S.R. CHOWDHRY
Unions should first focus their full attention on early and honourable settlement of charter of demands which is already too much delayed.