http://in.rediff.com/money/2005/jan/24guest.htm
        
        
Large reserves, poor country

January 24, 2005

While writing about the level of foreign exchange reserves some time
back, I had expressed an apprehension that it may give our political
masters the delusions of being rich.

One manifestation of this was the previous government's petty gestures
like prepaying some concessional aid from the smaller countries, and
refusing foreign help at the time of the Gujarat earthquake.

Even the present government initially seemed to take a similar stand
to the tsunami devastation in Andaman and Nicobar, and east coast.

But the prime minister quickly changed that and acknowledged that "our
response was not shaped by false pride or by chauvinism". However, it
did look like that to many.

In fact, the incident reminded me of an experience I had about 30
years ago. I was working with the State Bank of India and one of my
colleagues had been selected to go abroad for a training programme. He
was told this just a couple of weeks before the programme was to
commence.

Though he did not even have a passport, he was keen on not missing out
on the opportunity. He also knew that in the normal course it would be
impossible for him to get a passport and visa in two weeks. He
requested me to talk to one of our exporter clients and seek his help
in getting the passport.

Businessmen then, as now, knew ways of expediting things. The passport
was delivered in a week's time. I called the colleague to my room so
that he could thank the businessman for his help. He did so, and
offered to reimburse any taxi or conveyance expenses that may have
been incurred. While thankful for the help, he did not like to have
anybody's "obligations".

I wonder sometimes whether some of our actions in refusing a helping
hand do not fall in the same category. Surely, prickliness and haughty
refusal of help that is genuinely offered are not signs of a nation
mature, confident of its place in the world, and of its strength.

While we may not ask for help, surely there should be no loss of pride
in accepting what is offered? After all, the resources that would get
diverted to the tsunami victims will surely come from some other
equally worthy, if less headlined, need -- the provision of schools,
drinking water and roads in villages, for instance.

In this connection, much has been made of the $4 billion worth of aid
committed by the world community to help the tsunami victims.

Past experience suggests that many such pledges do not get converted
to disbursements, and that much of the money is merely diverted from
other aid programs.

To quote just one instance, the entire US pledge of $35
million-increased-to-$350 million is coming from the existing Agency
for International Development budget.

While on the subject of national pride, and in the context of the
recent Pravasi Bharatiya conference in Mumbai, I noticed an
interesting difference.

When I used to work in the UK in the 1970s, British residents/
citizens of Indian origin preferred to call themselves Asians rather
than Indians -- which is associated with poverty and the Hindu rate of
growth.

Lately, however, this seems to have changed with the Hindus and the
Sikhs preferring the label Indian to Asian (even the BBC recently
broadcast a programme "Don't Call Me Asian").

One reason could of course be an attempt to have a separate identity
from the Muslims, post-9/11; but another reason is the identification
with the second-fastest growing economy in the world.

Coming back to the reserves, it would do well to remember that we
remain one of the poorest countries in the world in per capita income,
and that there are vast investment needs for which adequate rupee
resources are not available.

Yes, a poor country can have large reserves but it would be foolish to
consider the latter to be synonymous with national wealth. The
availability of reserves merely removes one historical (but of our own
making) constraint on growth, namely foreign exchange for imports.

Having said this, after reading a lot of media commentary on the
governor's statements and the finance minister on foreign
institutional investor inflows, I personally felt that the differences
were overblown, that it was more a media-created storm in a tea-cup.

All that the governor said was that, "A view needs to be taken on
capping FII flows into the markets. Price-based measures such as taxes
could be examined though their effectiveness is arguable."

The finance minister also said that, "options would be kept open". If
markets overreact, as they often have a tendency to do, is it right to
blame the statement or its maker?

Markets rarely respond consistently or proportionately to "news"
(except in academic literature) and cause-and-effect relationships in
market movements are often extremely tenuous.

But that apart, one suggestion for the authorities: permit -- indeed
encourage -- the corporate sector to float dollar denominated, rupee
settlement bonds in the local market in lieu of external commercial
borrowings.

In the current interest rate environment, the full cost (inclusive of
withholding tax) of fixed rate dollar and rupee bonds may not be too
different.

Corporations would get dollar interest rate loans as they want,
converting fixed rate to floating rates through an interest rate swap
if so desired, and residents dollar denominated assets without the
hassle of going to external markets, reducing both capital flows and
money supply. Any takers?

-- 
Cheers,

Gabe.

Wimbledon - London
England.

Reply via email to