MPs panel exercised over naval delays

NEW DELHI: Parliament''s standing committees are designed to be a system of monitoring different government ministries, an essential exercise in any democracy. But what if members of such committees don''t appear to show any interest in their working? Or again, what if the ministry doesn''t take seriously reports of these committees? It then becomes a perfunctory exercise in ritualistic tabling of the reports in Parliament.That appears to be the case with two reports of Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence, which focused on the Navy - one on `modernisation/upgradation of the naval fleet'' (eighth report) and `overhaul/maintenance facilities of naval ships'' (ninth report) - tabled last week. Of its 43 members, only 12 (about 25 per cent) attended the committee meeting last October while a `higher'' attendance of 20 (less than 50 per cent) was recorded in December. The absence of most members from committee meetings was, however, compensated by overwhelming sympathy of the rest of the members for the Navy''s cause. But if the committee''s quantitative interest was low, the defence ministry too had qualitatively little to show. For example, while regretting the inordinate delays in the Project Sea Bird, ``which is one of the most strategic and ambitious projects of the Indian Navy'''' and ``deserves to be accorded high priority and completed expeditiously'''', the ninth report points to how such exhortations have been made in three previous reports tabled in May 1995, April 1999 and then again in April this year. How far does Sea Bird actually date back to? The Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs sanctioned this project, which involves building a naval base at Karwar on the western coast, in August 1985. But it took 10 more years for the Cabinet to approve construction, and that too for a reduced Phase-I to be completed by 2005. Karwar is considered important because it is meant to decongest the naval base at Mumbai. The west coast metropolis is no longer considered secure or exclusive. Besides, weapon systems cannot be developed or tested in an ``exclusive environment''''. A Chinese, Pakistani or any foreign tourist, for example, has simply to check into a sea facing room in Taj Hotel or walk up the SEBI building from where he can legitimately view the all-important Western Naval Fleet - its ships and submarines, both in operation and under repair. The ninth report, which provides details of the Navy''s maintenance philosophy, individually analyses the repair infrastructure and spells out deficiencies in the overhaul and maintenance facilities for naval ships. While such facilities are far better and mostly confined to Mumbai and Vishakhapatnam dockyards, the deficiencies are far more pronounced in both the Kochi and Port Blair ship repair yards. For example, Port Blair, located almost 1,500 km from the mainland, can only meet short refit requirements of minor war vessels. Going by the eighth report, even the expression abject neglect may not adequately describe the government''s defence planning and management. By its own admission, the defence ministry has said that no major naval acquisitions were made between 1984-1996 - a 12-year period which witnessed ``serious internal disturbances'''', ``postponement of a second nuclear test'''', and ``an assassination'''' each ``of a Prime Minister and an ex-Prime Minister'''' while the ``economy opened up as a positive phenomenon''''. Noting that the lull in naval development ``is in this context intriguing'''', the committee has asked the government ``to convincingly explain this inertia in naval development''''. But then the question arises whether something will come out of such an explanation, or will it just go into another file. Interestingly, the committee has subtly acknowledged the indigenous nuclear-powered submarine project by recommending that the government ``review and accelerate its Nuclear Policy for fabricating or for acquiring nuclear submarines to add to the deterrent potential of the Indian Navy''''. The eighth report, which essentially contained action taken on an earlier report on upgradation and modernisation of the naval fleet, predictably asked the government to show ``extraordinary urgency'''' in acquiring equipment, from aircraft carriers, ships, submarines, to various support and reconnaissance aircraft. The issue was candidly summed up by former Navy chief Admiral V S Shekawat four years ago. During his farewell speech to officers and sailors of the Western and Southern naval commands in September 1996, he bluntly observed that defence ministry bureaucrats had no understanding of naval matters. The beseeching language used in successive parliamentary standing committee reports on defence only bears out Shekawat''s remark. Perhaps the opening lines from a poem by Erich Fried sums it all: ``It has happened/ and it goes on happening/ and will happen again...