Citizens' Issues
Railways promises to make additional 23 emergency medical rooms operational by October
During a hearing at the Bombay HC, the Railways said it would set up EMRs at 23 additional stations and make it operational by October this year
 
The Indian Railways has assured the Bombay High Court that it would set up emergency medical rooms (EMRs) at 23 additional stations and would make it operational by October this year. The HC was hearing a petition filed by railway and RTI activist Sameer Zaveri.
 
A division bench of Justices Abhay Oka and Anil Menon stated the need for such emergency care units at all stations. "Setting up of emergency medical rooms was the first phase. The railways should now take responsibility and make available medical facilities at each and every station," the Bench said. 
 
The bench also observed that most doctors who sit in the 108 Ambulance service outside 48 stations are not qualified or trained to handle medical emergency and trauma situations, as they are not MBBS graduates, but Ayurvedic doctors. “Mandatory training should be provided at government centres, otherwise the purpose of having doctors in the ambulances is not served," the Judges said.
 
The Railways have promised to set up EMR units at Stations in the Central, Western and the Harbour line at Churchgate, Mumbai Central, Bandra, Andheri, Goregaon, Malad, Kandivli, Borivli, Vasai Road, Virar, Palghar, CST, Kurla, Ghatkopar, Mulund, Thane, Dombivli/Kopar, Kalyan, Vadala Road, Vashi, Panvel and Karjat. 
 
As of now, the only EMR unit set up by the Railways is located in Dadar, and that too was set up under the orders of the High Court. This time around, while the Railways has promised to set up other units, it has requested for exemption from setting up such units at CST and Kopar – the former because of its vicinity to St. George hospital, and the latter owing to its inaccessibility. 
 
The Railways accepted that stationmasters are also ill equipped to handle track-accident cases, or even escort victims to the hospital, since these were medico-legal cases. They insisted that it is the GRP that can handle these situations, and they would need to be deployed at stations at all times.
 
The HC has scheduled a hearing on this matter for 25th March. 
 
One would recall that only last month, a young woman lost her life after she fell off a moving train after someone threw a stone at her, and the GRP constable refused to take her to a private hospital. She died because she did not get medical aid in time. 
 
Railway activists can perhaps now breathe a sigh of relief, as this landmark move is a result of more than a decade long struggle on their part to get the railways to provide emergency medical aid to passengers who suffer injuries while travelling in, or getting in and out of trains. Reasons such as falling off overcrowded trains, or into gaps between platforms and trains, or being run over by trains while crossing tracks, have resulted in around 6,617 accidents on the tracks, including 3,352 deaths in 2014 alone. The Railways has, in most cases, refused to accept any responsibility for these accidents, usually blaming negligence on the part of passengers for the same. 

 

User

Insurance Bill will catalyse Indian economy
Insurance Bill will positively impact the nearly 800 million uninsured Indians as well as help consumers with easy access to and affordable insurance
 
The Insurance Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2015 is the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government’s first significant piece of economic legislation. It is a reformist legislation that will positively impact insurance consumers of our country, in particular, and the economy in general.
 
Bill is Pro-consumer and Pro-investment:
 
At the heart of this legislation, and the increase in foreign direct investment (FDI) limit in insurance, is the Indian citizen and an insurance consumer. India remains an underinsured country, under pensioned and underfunded on issues of social security.  While averages and statistics that are trotted out usually may paint one picture, the reality is that at the bottom of our economic pyramid, large numbers of citizens are underinsured.
 
Insurance penetration in India is at 3.9% is below the world average of 6.3%, as per the figures in 2013 and is a very low 17th out of 62 nations.  Compare this with, South Africa (15.4%) followed by South Korea (11.9%); the UK (11.5%); Japan (11.1%) and remember these are penetration adjusted for GDP!
 
Over 800 millions of Indians are uninsured lives. Many more in health, livelihoods and assets remain uncovered by insurance. This low insurance density needs to be urgently addressed and this can be only be done rapidly by introducing more insurance companies and more investment into the sector. More players mean more investment and also more competition. More competition means lower prices for consumers and increased affordability.  Competition, and more competition through many companies, is the only sustainable way for Indian consumers to get easy access to and affordable insurance.
 
Why FDI and no funding from domestic sources is one of the questions posed by opponents of the Bill. The question can be posed to all sectors that attract FDI today – telecom, infrastructure, services, airlines, and homes – Why FDI at all?
 
It is that while our economy is a growth economy, just like any other economy, we have finite resources and these need to be prioritised. We need our domestic resources for areas where private capital will not go like social sector, poverty programs of the government and rural infrastructure.  If we can raise additional resources from external sources, it is good economics and politics to do so. Even a country like China economic playbook has FDI at its core.
 
On the issue of opposition to FDI, it must be pointed out that foreign equity is in insurance and every other sector through the foreign institutional investment (FII) route anyway. FDI is actually better for the country’s economy, since its more long term and creates tangible assets as opposed to FII, which are speculative and short term in nature. It is a flawed and contradictory position and inconsistent with demands of todays’ consumers that want choice and competition as their right. 
 
The dynamics of a well-insured society are transformational. High insurance densities have huge impacts on societal wellbeing, health, family standards of living one end of the spectrum of benefits. It also creates an economy of high savings rates, improved long-term capital availability to the financial sector, which in turn makes long-term infrastructure financing easier. So, catalysing the insurance sector and regulating it well is good for consumer and the economy. 
 
The Budget 2015 has introduced into our economic architecture some new structural propositions that directly influence the poor and needy citizens of India. The accident insurance, pensions and insurance are the first few steps in creating a social security framework. Every developed democracy has a social security net that ensures a targeted and sustainably funded model that backstops the poor and needy or temporarily out of work. This legislation also further powers this architecture because it makes insurance more affordable by creating competition.
 
There are some elements in the Bill that could have been avoided or improved. The Bill talks about Indian control. It could be misunderstood to imply that it creates two classes of investors, giving a certain group of Indian investors’ rights disproportionate to their holdings and perpetuates the 80’s bhumiputra type differentiation. This is not contemporary thinking. For a nation that needs to attracts billions of dollars of investment into Make in India, Digital India, Defence, Infrastructure and services – creating economic differentiation between foreign and Indian investors is not a good idea and only perpetuates a culture of rent seeking amongst some Indian businessmen and corporate groups that have done it for several years
 
In addition, the Bill misses a big opportunity to create a reinsurance hub and thousands of jobs associated within India. With Dubai and Singapore fast emerging as reinsurance hubs that are moving markets away from traditional Europe and North America, it seems that we have not thought this through. For a reinsurance hub in India, the FDI limits will have to be higher. 
 
The government and Finance Minister must commit that they will work to making insurance public sector units (PSUs) even more competitive and strong by redesigning how they are managed and run. PSUs must be investment assets for the government, but not by preserving monopolies but by transforming them to market leaders and world beaters, even as the insurance market grows. Countries like Singapore has shown how government linked companies can perform well and that vision must be unveiled here as well.
 
The Insurance Laws (Amendment) Bill is pro-competition and pro-consumer. It is pro-investment and pro-economy, is a reformist legislation that will catalyse the insurance sector and the economy. 
 
(Rajeev Chandrasekhar, an independent member of the Rajya Sabha, is also a member of the Standing Committee on Finance and a technology entrepreneur

User

COMMENTS

vishal

2 years ago

The state owned LIC has served the Government to bring in lot of money but has not penetrated the masses as they claim. Further they have made a tremendous fortune at the expense of lapsed policies. Compared to our population the benefit of Insurance has reached only a minor segment of the people. The bill does not answer the shortcomings of the nature of the business carried out by Insurers.

R Balakrishnan

2 years ago

We are all missing the point. Is this an industry that is needed at all? It is an industry that erodes the wealth of a citizen and redistributes it to those who are the conmen in the the financial services sector. It would be nice if Insurance can be restricted to health, general insurance and pure term or pure life. Unfortunately, insurance cos mis-sell investment products that cheat consumers, with active support and encouragement of government agencies like IRDA.
The second thing is the permission to increase from 26 to 49%. For a promoter, this is a meaningless threshold. Of course, there are ways to control, holding even 26% (the Metlife Model) or by some legal chicanery.
We are already seeing agencies like LIC being abused by the government to park inconvenient and lousy investments- PSU Bank capital is a prime example. If anything, throw the insurance open 100% to the goras- Tax them higher than the domestics. And prohibit selling of any investment products. India is funny. Those who need insurance cannot afford it and those who buy it are generally those who do not need it.

Rajaram Bojji

2 years ago

Dear Rajeev Ji, Nice write up but one caution.
Insurance creates fear in general in large number of people who never need to access benefit, showing benefit to hardly few who needed. The business model has to be built on that basis.
At individual level fear can take away insurance premiums totaling almost 30 to 40% of earnings!
Just check numbers in adv countries. The job earnings become so critical and unless one earns one cannot pay insurance premiums.
Fear built in is palpable and people get tremendously stressed to keep job.
Now for those without job or retired insurance penetrated and driven societies create a truly frightening living.
The fat insurance companies become powerful political lobbyists , and policy drivers. Further they take over health care and control how medical care has to be administered.
Too many additional layers of costs get introduced in society.
The funds rich insurance companies drive stock market too.
It is also fact of life, the really needed help to a needy is quite often denied or only pittance granted at the mercy of mercenary insurance officers whose bonus is tied with net profit to company
The common man at the bottom of this ladder, finally finds all round mechanisms to only drain him for his cash.
That is development of course.
This is what a Goan fisherman told me that I was stupid.
He wears only shirt and loin cloth , catches fish blocking tidalfow, cooks rice grown own field , makes his feni, eats, drinks, rests happily on beach gazing up in sky! Paradise! Why development?
Rural folk in India really get benefited or or urban business communities enjoy better finance options and earn , so that they can go to Goa and lie down next to that happy Goan, is a moot point.
China seems to have resisted . Or I am wrong?
On Konkan Rly acted as self insurer for accidents and health care , using funds which otherwuse I was asked to pay by insurance companies. A virtual company I ran. Let me tell you. Huge profits ! I saved money not insuring for the company!
Hare Krishna!

REPLY

sivaraman anant narayan

In Reply to Rajaram Bojji 2 years ago

Couldn't agree with you more. We had a very savvy finance director who refused to insure the fleet of company cars,believing only in self-insurance,saving a lot of money for the Co.

SAT quashes SEBI’s 3-year trading ban order against DLF

Calling a three year ban on DLF and its top six executives as 'over-regulation', a majority view of the three-judge SAT bench quashed SEBI's order

 

The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) on Friday quashed and set aside the order issued by market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against DLF Ltd and its directors including the group's executive chairman Kushal Pal (KP) Singh.
 
A majority view of the three-judge bench ruled that SEBI's order against DLF was a case of over-regulation in the capital markets. “The respondent’s (SEBI) order is not pragmatic. The order is like a troubled sea... hence it is quashed and set aside,” said Jog Singh, member of SAT, who read out the majority view of SAT members. 
 
Last year in October, SEBI had barred the realty company and its six top executives, including Singh, from markets for three years. Other than Singh, who is the executive chairman of DLF, SEBI barred Rajiv Singh, vice chairman and son of KP Singh, TC Goyal, managing director, Pia Singh, whole time director and younger daughter of the DLF chief, Kameshwar Swarup, executive director for legal, GS Talwar, director and son-in-law of KP Singh and Ramesh Sanka, chief financial officer (CFO) of DLF.
 
In an order issued on 10 October 2014, Rajeev Kumar Agarwal, whole time member of SEBI, said, "...the process of share transfer of three subsidiaries of DLF in Sudipti Estates Pvt Ltd, Shalika Estate Developers Pvt Ltd and Felicite Builders & Construction Pvt Ltd was through sham transactions as alleged in the show cause notice (SCN) and that the Noticees employed a plan, scheme, design and device to camouflage the association of DLF with its three subsidiaries, namely, Felicite, Shalika and Sudipti. In this case under such plan, scheme, design and device, the Noticees suppressed several material information in the draft Red Herring Prospectus (RHP)/ Prospectus of DLF and actively concealed the fact about filing of FIR against Sudipti and others. In the facts and circumstances of this case, I find that the case of active and deliberate suppression of any material information so as to mislead and defraud the investors in the securities market in connection with the issue of shares of DLF in its initial public offering (IPO) is clearly made out in this case."
 
Last month, SEBI imposed a total penalty of Rs86 crore on DLF, the company’s top officials and some of its subsidiaries, after finding them guilty of engaging in unfair trade practices.
 
In 2007, Kimsuk Krishna Sinha, a businessman from Delhi had alleged that DLF and its directors and agents had lured and compelled him to transfer certain plots of land and did not fulfil the promise of developing the land and providing him higher returns.
 
Sinha had alleged that Sudipti, DLF Home Developers Ltd and DLF Estate Developers Ltd, were sister concerns and were part of the DLF group.
 
DLF, however, said that Sudipti was a separate legal entity, owned and controlled by different individuals. The construction major in its DRHP, filed for a public issue in May 2006, had mentioned that Sudipti was its associate company.
 
The DRHP however, had been withdrawn and a fresh prospectus was filed in January 2007, in which Sudipti was not mentioned as an associate.
 
Following a 2011 direction of the Delhi High Court to look into Sinha's complaint against the DLF Group and Sudipti Estates, SEBI passed an order to carry out the investigation into the allegations levelled by Sinha.
 
At 2.24pm Friday, DLF was trading 7% higher at Rs159 on the BSE, while the 30-share Sensex was marginally down at 28,790.
 

User

COMMENTS

R Balakrishnan

2 years ago

Smells. Simply tells me that money can buy anything. Sad state of affairs. But must confess that nothing good can come ever from SEBI.

REPLY

integrity

In Reply to R Balakrishnan 2 years ago

Yes! SEBI needs to be consistent. They had refused to take up the matter of fraud by Sahara credit cooperative society.
But SEBI alone can not be blamed

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)