Commonsense decision on Tata
Ibrahim Salek
WHEN I saw the headline of a recent article proclaim: "Let's make a commonsense decision on Tata" written by Nuruddin Mahmud Kamal in The Daily Star on August 22, I thought: "Great, now someone is coming to the crux of the matter and we are not hiding behind a veil of political excuse." But, alas, I soon found out the article truly proves the dictum -- commonsense is not common! Let me explain why. My learned friend the writer does not seem to have followed the progress on the Tata proposal ever since they signed the EOI with the government, all of which has been in the public domain, especially so because of the keen interest shown by the media.A few words, therefore, on the investors in question, before I dwell on BOI, the government and us, the people of Bangladesh. Tata in India, and indeed elsewhere, enjoys a level of credibility which is quite uncommon in today's globalised corporate world. This credibility has not been bought or developed over the past few years or decades. This has inadvertently come into being over time and began when Tatas set their foot on a foreign land, India in this case, in the early 1700s and settled there as common traders. They grew in spite of dominating British Rule and took on the Herculean task of industrialising India, even before the sub-continent gained independence. Post-independence they have continued to grow, getting into diverse sectors which include motor vehicles, steel, power plants, chemicals, telecom, IT, the list is quite long. Today, the conglomerate is run by a trust, which has a miniscule shareholding of the Tata family. It is a truly professional company where meritocracy rules the roost, and the premise for business is on sound ethical business practices. Needless to say, any organisation, leave alone a conglomerate with so little family shareholding, can sustain itself over the changing environment while continuously thriving, if it is not based on strong and ethical business practices. As far as its investment proposals for Bangladesh are concerned, it may be judicious to note the following facts. Tatas are a globalised company and have business interests across the globe. As the business of business evolves it is becoming increasingly clear that corporations, in order to be competitive, have to exploit economies of scale of manufacturing and therefore need to manufacture where there is the optimum availability of resources and market obviously to places where there is optimum demand. Tatas are no different, and are indeed in the process of spreading their wings to other countries across the world. They are setting up new companies or acquiring companies as the case may be. Bangladesh, in Tata's international endeavours, is but one of the destinations for its investments. If at all, the government decides not to go ahead with these investments, Tatas investment will find some other suitable destination. Having said that, Tatas also see merit in investing in Bangladesh. They do see a potential market, they see the availability of natural gas, and see an opportunity of making a return on their investment. Which, however, does not mean that they have to hide anything from the public eye or indulge in some covert activity. The government has a designated window through which foreign investment has to be handled (BOI), and Tata has done precisely that. It has engaged in discussion and submitted proposals to BOI and it is for BOI and in turn the government to decide whether Tata's proposal makes business sense or not. Tata, in turn, has studied the investment regime, the rule and regulations, the policies, which the government has put in place and based on those and its cost of manufacturing/processing and the capital investment involved, it has put forth its comprehensive offer. It has also done a study to quantify the benefits, direct and indirect to Bangladesh, which has been sent to the concerned quarters in the government, the ministries and bureaucrats, and of course Wahiduddin Mahmud, who have all unequivocally agreed to it in principle. The gas price sought by Tatas is based on gas pricing models prevalent in Bangladesh and, incidentally, it has turned out to be the highest price being offered by any corporate in the country. Gas security requested by Tatas, is also something that has been committed to other corporations like Lafarge and Holcim in the past in Bangladesh. So, there is no count on which Tatas have asked anything without precedence in Bangladesh. Now let me discuss the issue of energy security of Bangladesh. Everybody is quite well aware about the latest Wood Mackenzie's Gas Sector Master Plan (GSMP, January 2006) report which clearly indicates that the combined present Proven (P1) plus Probable (P2) reserve of 14 Tcf of gas. But it is also interesting to note that the Hydrocarbon Study undertaken by Petrobangla indicates that the P1 + P2 + P3 (Possible) reserve is far in excess of 45 Tcf. It has been seen across the world, that when P3 reserves are taken under actual E&P (Exploration and Production) contracts, then they end up exceeding the previously declared figure. So all this brouhaha of Bangladesh running short of gas by 2014 is incorrect. In other words, the barn and the horse are there, but for some reason, we refuse to open the door. It may be worthwhile to note that Tatas (who by the way have only asked for ten years of surety of gas supply) have decided to commit such a huge investment because they also are sure that availability of gas reserves is much more than the published figures. Tatas investment, therefore, is not going to precipitate any energy crisis; in fact it is going to encourage further exploration by providing the much-needed inflows to Petrobangla to revive its sagging E&P efforts. In fact, gas sitting under the surface is hardly of any use, but when exploited commercially, and with the multiplier effects of its commercial exploitation, the economy would get a booster shot. A commonsense decision from the government would therefore be to facilitate and expedite such big-ticket investments, which would have far-reaching impact on the economy of the country, generate employment, further industrialisation; and not get caught in political rhetoric and outdated ideologies, and be swayed by some misinformed and mal-intentioned elements, which under the garb of "voice of the people" will end up doing more harm than good to Bangladesh.
|
|